4 ms·
This is a community comms failure. Preventing the random extension I installed from hijacking my bank login page is good! Giving Mozilla the ability to disable
by Centigonal 3y ago
This is a community comms failure.
Preventing the random extension I installed from hijacking my bank login page is good! Giving Mozilla the ability to disable my adblocker or NoScript on an arbitrary domain list that they can update remotely is scary!
A blog post with Mozilla's plans for the feature, what they're implementing to limit abuse on Mozilla's side, and how users can opt out would make this a non-issue. It's nuts that the mozilla bug tracker is the best source for laypeople to get info on this.
- ygjb 3y ago> Preventing the random extension I installed from hijacking my bank login page is good! Giving Mozilla the ability to disable my adblocker or NoScript on an arbitrary domain list that they can update remotely is scary! So the ability for the web browser to arbitrarily add and remove features from the browser is scary? Just asking because there is a massive security trade-off and the intersection of a number of threat models in this comment. Do you trust the platform you use to download and execute arbitrary code (that is, web content) to automatically update itself? If not, how do you balance the lack of automated updates against the need to keep software up to date to prevent exploit of known vulnerabilities? If so, how do you distinguish the ability to download and execute new code that could remove or suppress the features you choose from the ability to enable and disable add-ons/extensions? There could have been better communication on this, but describing the feature as scary tells me you don't really understand the threat model around your use of a web browser, and may not be asking the right questions or considering the actual threats.