cdns

At this stage it looks like it's primarily for hosting of known versions of libraries by CDNs.

Many CDNs however suggest that your origin is contacted by nobody except the CDN itself (not true for CloudFlare, though).

Statistical data hints that JS cdns are in fact quite efficient at reaching their goals, but certainly doesn't prove anything conclusively.

Which is not talking about CDNs and JavaScript, but shared libraries on your desktop.

It seems very likely that CDNs will acquire special rights designations when it comes to content responsibility, much like search engines have.

Many of the CDNs will let you reference a specific version of the script.

I suppose the simplest solution is for the responsible cdns to just buy up all of their bitneighbors.

But CloudFlare or other CDNs and their systems _do not have such knowledge_.

It might have in a different geographic area to the Google servers/CDNs though.

I just tested this with uMatrix where I use pretty much the defaults, but allow the two CDNs for theverge.com.

If this is by design, then I don't understand most of the value proposition of CDNs.

I use uMatrix, and I have already whitelisted loading scripts from common CDNs as global rules.

In the case of some of those eavesdroppers, such as CDNs, GA or (to a slightly lesser amount) Facebook's "like" buttons, there is also the serious problem of aggregation.

This whole thing proves my point: Calling shared, common, publicly hosted copies of popular JS libraries "CDN's" or "JavaScript CDNs" is just confuses people.