5 ms·

Is v3 an horrible solution or the deprecation of v2 in 2023? I ported one of my extensions to v3 and while the process was not completely trivial it did not to

Is v3 an horrible solution or the deprecation of v2 in 2023? I ported one of my extensions to v3 and while the process was not completely trivial it did not took more than a few hours, in my opinion the change is worth it this makes extensions more secure. As far as I know Firefox is also moving to v3, maybe not enforcing it for now, but they will probably deprecate v2 at some point.

kevingadd 5y ago
An extension API that can't implement ad-blockers properly is an extension API that is broken by design. So yes, it's a horrible solution.
input_sh 5y ago
While they're interested in maintaining compatibility with Chrome's v3, there's no standard that forces them to make every single v3 change Chrome does. v2 also already differs in some ways in which Firefox thinks it makes sense. I'm not scared at all that they're gonna deprecate webRequest.BlockingResponse in favour of declarativeNetRequest, which is the specific API function that adblockers rely on. After all, that function has nothing to do with security, best you could argue is that it's related to performance due to filter lists becoming absurdly long.
- dotancohen 5y ago
  In the context of `webRequest.BlockingResponse` being a performance bottleneck due to filter lists becoming absurdly long, it does in fact become a security issue. Filter lists are as long as they are because that is the amount of domains that have demonstrated an interest in harming our security (and for many people, online privacy _is_ physical security). Filterlists are blacklists, not whitelists, so they only grow when well-known entities play foul.
selcuka 5y ago
It's not only a simple Manifest version change. They have also deprecated the webRequest API, which is essential to implement any type of content filter or an ad blocker.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
The new declarative APIs are great. They will protect user data from potentially malicious extensions. The thing is uBlock Origin is just so important and trusted that these restrictions shouldn't apply to it. The functionality of uBlock Origin is just so fundamental and unambiguously pro-user it should be integrated into the browsers themselves. Conflicts of interest prevent that unfortunately but the fact remains that browsers without uBlock Origin installed cannot call themselves user agents. uBlock Origin should just get access to everything so it can do its job as well as it possibly can. For everyone else, there's the standard APIs.
- BoxOfRain 5y ago
  Google is first and foremost an advertising company, it's in their interest to hobble ad blockers as much as possible. Personally I'm hoping that they do, because it'll drive people away from Chrome and nip what's looking increasingly like a monopoly in the bud by driving users to browsers that do support ad blocking.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > it'll drive people away from Chrome and nip what's looking increasingly like a monopoly in the bud by driving users to browsers that do support ad blocking I certainly hope so. I showed Firefox and uBlock Origin to all my friends and they loved it, especially the fact it blocks YouTube ads. Lots of people simply don't know about this.
    - BoxOfRain 5y ago
      Yeah, I don't really do "tech support" for family members any more because I've not used Windows in such a long time I'm pretty useless at troubleshooting it, but I do take the time to install Firefox and ad blockers on it which is worthwhile even if you don't have an issue with the adtech industry because it reduces the attack surface for malware.
      - matheusmoreira 5y ago

kevingadd 5y ago

An extension API that can't implement ad-blockers properly is an extension API that is broken by design. So yes, it's a horrible solution.

input_sh 5y ago

While they're interested in maintaining compatibility with Chrome's v3, there's no standard that forces them to make every single v3 change Chrome does. v2 also already differs in some ways in which Firefox thinks it makes sense. I'm not scared at all that they're gonna deprecate webRequest.BlockingResponse in favour of declarativeNetRequest, which is the specific API function that adblockers rely on. After all, that function has nothing to do with security, best you could argue is that it's related to performance due to filter lists becoming absurdly long.

dotancohen 5y ago
In the context of `webRequest.BlockingResponse` being a performance bottleneck due to filter lists becoming absurdly long, it does in fact become a security issue. Filter lists are as long as they are because that is the amount of domains that have demonstrated an interest in harming our security (and for many people, online privacy _is_ physical security). Filterlists are blacklists, not whitelists, so they only grow when well-known entities play foul.

selcuka 5y ago

It's not only a simple Manifest version change. They have also deprecated the webRequest API, which is essential to implement any type of content filter or an ad blocker.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

The new declarative APIs are great. They will protect user data from potentially malicious extensions. The thing is uBlock Origin is just so important and trusted that these restrictions shouldn't apply to it. The functionality of uBlock Origin is just so fundamental and unambiguously pro-user it should be integrated into the browsers themselves. Conflicts of interest prevent that unfortunately but the fact remains that browsers without uBlock Origin installed cannot call themselves user agents. uBlock Origin should just get access to everything so it can do its job as well as it possibly can. For everyone else, there's the standard APIs.

BoxOfRain 5y ago
Google is first and foremost an advertising company, it's in their interest to hobble ad blockers as much as possible. Personally I'm hoping that they do, because it'll drive people away from Chrome and nip what's looking increasingly like a monopoly in the bud by driving users to browsers that do support ad blocking.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > it'll drive people away from Chrome and nip what's looking increasingly like a monopoly in the bud by driving users to browsers that do support ad blocking I certainly hope so. I showed Firefox and uBlock Origin to all my friends and they loved it, especially the fact it blocks YouTube ads. Lots of people simply don't know about this.
  - BoxOfRain 5y ago
    Yeah, I don't really do "tech support" for family members any more because I've not used Windows in such a long time I'm pretty useless at troubleshooting it, but I do take the time to install Firefox and ad blockers on it which is worthwhile even if you don't have an issue with the adtech industry because it reduces the attack surface for malware.
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago