6 ms·

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addon

That's not true. It's more that Mozilla white lists only very few of the addons for the mobile browser. The fork Iceraven whitelists/allow all (?) of the addons (not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose): https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser

vintermann 4y ago
Yes, I thought it was odd, since I certainly use ublock origin right now. It is the reason I stick with Firefox on Android in the first place.
- oittaa 4y ago
  Same, but it would be nice if all the plugins worked instead of the few that are whitelisted.
ropeladder 4y ago
"the whitelist has a purpose" doesn't really capture what's going on, though. It's more like they whitelisted some of the most popular extensions and then just stopped completely with no intention of continuing. With the much more limited plugin API (and simple html plug-in config pages) of the new browsers you'd think it would be easier to build and vet secure, cross platform add-ons.
- sbernecchia 4y ago
  yes, you're probably right, they have no intention of continuing. I think mozilla is not really committed to firefox on android. after all they have a minuscule market share on mobile, almost not existent. they probably think that most users will install just an adblocker, so they don't want to "waste" money enabling other extensions. so sad.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  Somewhere in a parallel universe, Mozilla just let all the plugins claim compatability, and vaguely fascist users who dont like their politics are complaining that the instability of Mozilla on Android is the reason they hate them. And further along, in a universe where they poured a lot of time energy and money into fixing the whole plugin ecosystem and succeeded, they're complaining about something that didn't get done because of that shift in focus. The conversation goes something like: "Why are they spending time and money on fixing mobile addons no one uses? I think this is because their management are too political, not like their old unpolitical leadership. And as I say every time they get mentioned "I hate people who say and do political stuff!!". It makes me so angry. They should only do what I want or I'll force them out of business from pure spite. That'll teach them to be political.
  - akira2501 4y ago
    So, Mozilla makes decisions to win over vaguely fascist users, or at least prevent them from having something negative to say? Or because in other universes there aren't perfect solutions? Do they have any desire to just.. make a good browser that fulfills peoples needs?
    - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      The point is, if you don't like an organisation for reason A, you'll easily find reason X, Y and Z why you don't like them. Ask someone who grew up supporting a certain sports team or religion why they don't like the rival team or religion, and they'll happily give you answers why. They may even believe some of them themselves. Some of them might even be valid criticisms, but they are almost certainly not why someone chose their home team or religion over another. This never ending drama seems to mostly stem from Mozilla ditching a potential CEO because his religious beliefs meant he felt he had to fund anti-equal marriage organisations. It all seems like echoes of that to me. 8 years of boring whiney echoes.
      - teddyh 4y ago
        Yes. Humans make decisions based on feeling and intuition, and most people then check the decision for any glaring errors by using rules of thumb, and, in rare cases, reasoned logic. But nobody makes decisions based on logic. We all just have opinions, and later, when pressed, find “reasons” to keep them. See also this discussion about how to choose a phone: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21656790#21661157 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21656790#21661157
mikae1 4y ago
Last time I used Iceraven many, but far from all, extensions were whitelisted. What's worse, bookmarklets were as broken in Iceraven as in Firefox. I never though it would happen (I've been an extremely loyal Firefox user), but I had to switch to Kiwi.
contravariant 4y ago
There is in fact a way to plug in your own whitelist if you use Firefox Nightly [1]. It's a bit of a hassle though, and it's so obscure that I'm fairly sure almost nobody is aware of it. [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extension-support-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...
- nick__m 4y ago
  I use this ! When this was released I switch back from IceRaven to Firefox as I prefer a browser that receives timely updates.
  - sbernecchia 4y ago
    then you could try fennec from f-droid, which enables custom extensions and about:config, but unlike iceraven is compiled from firefox stable release, so it is updated shortly after a new firefox stable release.
    - xigoi 4y ago
      Last time I used Fennec, it had the same extension whitelist as Firefox. Did that change?
      - commoner 4y ago
        Fennec F-Droid does have the same extension whitelist by default, but it also supports the Collections workaround that adds access to all add-ons on addons.mozilla.org: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extension-support-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio... Since Firefox Nightly is unstable, some users prefer to use Firefox forks like Fennec F-Droid and Mull that are based on the stable release channel, yet also offer expanded add-on support.
        capitainenemo 4y ago
iggldiggl 4y ago
> "not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose" Fennec only supported a limited (perhaps slightly larger than what is currently supported) subset of the Webextension API, too, and yet there were no artificial restrictions on add-on installation.

vintermann 4y ago

Yes, I thought it was odd, since I certainly use ublock origin right now. It is the reason I stick with Firefox on Android in the first place.

oittaa 4y ago
Same, but it would be nice if all the plugins worked instead of the few that are whitelisted.

ropeladder 4y ago

"the whitelist has a purpose" doesn't really capture what's going on, though. It's more like they whitelisted some of the most popular extensions and then just stopped completely with no intention of continuing. With the much more limited plugin API (and simple html plug-in config pages) of the new browsers you'd think it would be easier to build and vet secure, cross platform add-ons.

sbernecchia 4y ago
yes, you're probably right, they have no intention of continuing. I think mozilla is not really committed to firefox on android. after all they have a minuscule market share on mobile, almost not existent. they probably think that most users will install just an adblocker, so they don't want to "waste" money enabling other extensions. so sad.
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Somewhere in a parallel universe, Mozilla just let all the plugins claim compatability, and vaguely fascist users who dont like their politics are complaining that the instability of Mozilla on Android is the reason they hate them. And further along, in a universe where they poured a lot of time energy and money into fixing the whole plugin ecosystem and succeeded, they're complaining about something that didn't get done because of that shift in focus. The conversation goes something like: "Why are they spending time and money on fixing mobile addons no one uses? I think this is because their management are too political, not like their old unpolitical leadership. And as I say every time they get mentioned "I hate people who say and do political stuff!!". It makes me so angry. They should only do what I want or I'll force them out of business from pure spite. That'll teach them to be political.
- akira2501 4y ago
  So, Mozilla makes decisions to win over vaguely fascist users, or at least prevent them from having something negative to say? Or because in other universes there aren't perfect solutions? Do they have any desire to just.. make a good browser that fulfills peoples needs?
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    The point is, if you don't like an organisation for reason A, you'll easily find reason X, Y and Z why you don't like them. Ask someone who grew up supporting a certain sports team or religion why they don't like the rival team or religion, and they'll happily give you answers why. They may even believe some of them themselves. Some of them might even be valid criticisms, but they are almost certainly not why someone chose their home team or religion over another. This never ending drama seems to mostly stem from Mozilla ditching a potential CEO because his religious beliefs meant he felt he had to fund anti-equal marriage organisations. It all seems like echoes of that to me. 8 years of boring whiney echoes.
    - teddyh 4y ago
      Yes. Humans make decisions based on feeling and intuition, and most people then check the decision for any glaring errors by using rules of thumb, and, in rare cases, reasoned logic. But nobody makes decisions based on logic. We all just have opinions, and later, when pressed, find “reasons” to keep them. See also this discussion about how to choose a phone: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21656790#21661157 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21656790#21661157

mikae1 4y ago

Last time I used Iceraven many, but far from all, extensions were whitelisted. What's worse, bookmarklets were as broken in Iceraven as in Firefox. I never though it would happen (I've been an extremely loyal Firefox user), but I had to switch to Kiwi.

contravariant 4y ago

There is in fact a way to plug in your own whitelist if you use Firefox Nightly [1]. It's a bit of a hassle though, and it's so obscure that I'm fairly sure almost nobody is aware of it. [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extension-support-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...

nick__m 4y ago
I use this ! When this was released I switch back from IceRaven to Firefox as I prefer a browser that receives timely updates.
- sbernecchia 4y ago
  then you could try fennec from f-droid, which enables custom extensions and about:config, but unlike iceraven is compiled from firefox stable release, so it is updated shortly after a new firefox stable release.
  - xigoi 4y ago
    Last time I used Fennec, it had the same extension whitelist as Firefox. Did that change?
    - commoner 4y ago
      Fennec F-Droid does have the same extension whitelist by default, but it also supports the Collections workaround that adds access to all add-ons on addons.mozilla.org: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extension-support-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio... Since Firefox Nightly is unstable, some users prefer to use Firefox forks like Fennec F-Droid and Mull that are based on the stable release channel, yet also offer expanded add-on support.
      - capitainenemo 4y ago

iggldiggl 4y ago

> "not all work fully, so the whitelist has a purpose" Fennec only supported a limited (perhaps slightly larger than what is currently supported) subset of the Webextension API, too, and yet there were no artificial restrictions on add-on installation.