Discovered a block bypass: a locked block can be disabled by moving a different block ahead of it

[iliadaili]

Hi!

I discovered a workaround for locked blocks, that is, blocks with the ''prevent access to options for this block set at times when these sites are blocked'' option enabled. If I have, for example, a block for YouTube that gets locked when it's on, I can disable it by creating another block for youtube that puts a filter on the page instead of fully blocking it. So, instead of being unable to use YouTube, I can easily get access to it with grayscale or some other filter. This issue actually appeared with the implementation of a suggestion that I gave before, so I am sorry for this. I didn't foresee that it would create this problem.

I think maybe the problem could be resolved by temporarily prioritizing locked blocks when they are turned on, so every locked block would be prioritized above all others. Of course, you could still create a block with a filter and lock it. But then, when two locked blocks targetted the same site, the one that started before would take precedence, so you wouldn't be able to bypass the block middway the block period (which is the issue really, since the block can be edited freely when it's off).

I don't suppose this would be easy, considering keywords and every functionality that leechblock offers inside a block, but I hope it can be helpful.

Maybe, if that doesn't work, the prioritization between locked blocks could happen according to how strict a block is, so it would be something like: blocks that fully block website > blocks that take you to a delaying page of 2X seconds > blocks that take you to a delaying page of X seconds > muted filter blocks > unmuted filter blocks.

Thank you for reading.

[proginosko]

Thanks for posting the issue. I appreciate the suggestions, but I worry that prioritizing blocks according to a complicate algorithm will spell confusion for users. A simpler solution would be to disallow moving any block sets before any locked sets.