2 ms·

Mozilla will certainly continue to sign my piracy-enabling add-on that is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide, even after an US court ordered them n

Mozilla will certainly continue to sign my piracy-enabling add-on that is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide, even after an US court ordered them not to sign it explicitly? I also heard mozilla got an NSL for my "Ed Snowden for president, Find out more on wikileaks" add-on, or rather, I didn't because NSL. Then again, I hear a brought coalition of human rights, LGBT and feminist groups lobbying mozilla not to sign my "Find nearest public stoning near you - Saudi Arabia Editon" add-on any more, effectively blacklisting it worldwide. But mozilla will keep to their promise not to blacklist my stuff and my regular users can still use my add-on, right? The creator of Javascript and mozilla CEO Brendan Eich will make sure of it... Oh wait... Speaking of which, what about my "mozilla - not protecting Brendan from harm was shit" add-on, is that compliant with the mozilla trademark policy that I need to abide by per https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Add-on_guidelines https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Add-on_guideline... ? Yes, those examples are a bit contrived, but actually not that much over the top. Also, please note that I do not necessarily condone these things ;) My point being: Security through tech-enforce policy is nice and has a lot of upsides as you say, I agree, but it also may have downsides you aren't even aware of.

soapdog 11y ago
You understand that the addon signing process is automated right? Addon signing is not the same as AMO review. You can sign your addons and distribute them on other channels if they don't match AMO review criterias.
- rndgermandude 11y ago
  You do understand that mozilla still could reject certain add-ons, even when only to be signed to be hosted elsewhere, and in fact they do: >Files submitted for signing will go through an automated review process. If they pass this review, they are automatically signed and sent back to the developer. This process should normally take seconds. If the file doesn't pass review, the developer will have the option to request a manual review, which should take less than two days. Right now, the automatic signing will probably only fail if malware is detected. The "Right now" part is what worries me a bit, tho.

soapdog 11y ago

You understand that the addon signing process is automated right? Addon signing is not the same as AMO review. You can sign your addons and distribute them on other channels if they don't match AMO review criterias.

rndgermandude 11y ago
You do understand that mozilla still could reject certain add-ons, even when only to be signed to be hosted elsewhere, and in fact they do: >Files submitted for signing will go through an automated review process. If they pass this review, they are automatically signed and sent back to the developer. This process should normally take seconds. If the file doesn't pass review, the developer will have the option to request a manual review, which should take less than two days. Right now, the automatic signing will probably only fail if malware is detected. The "Right now" part is what worries me a bit, tho.