3 ms·
Well I'm more thinking of the problem that browser extensions had, where people would make something handy or fun, be granted perms by the user, then get sold t
by pfraze 5y ago
Well I'm more thinking of the problem that browser extensions had, where people would make something handy or fun, be granted perms by the user, then get sold to people looking to mine user data. Extension authors get solicitations for these sales constantly, and the sale prices can be really tempting for devs. A friend of mine just made a silly "cursor sparkles" extension and he's mentioned multiple of these emails.
Regardless of how you feel about it, the Cambridge Analytica ordeal was entirely about using benign quiz apps to mine user data, and the pressure that Facebook received was to fix their security. That's a huge incentive to lock down fair access. So if this is the situation, we need to address it if we're going to fix the technical pressures that create monopolies.
- jatone 5y agothat's a user problem. they granted the extension permission to access the data. that's on them. You will never be able to solve that problem. after all a user can just hand out their credentials if they want to. Facebook's issues stems from the fact they allowed apps in their market to access data they didn't need to function / hide exactly how much access these applications are granted. the reality here is auth is the solution; for browser extensions we need better UX. if a extension is asking for access to your navigation / page data that needs to be flagged and warned about during the setup flow. many of these auth systems make the risky API access grants appear extremely benign.