5 ms·

One of the headline features for me is the Firefox recommended extensions program, where the extension code (and updated code) is manually vetted for malware an

One of the headline features for me is the Firefox recommended extensions program, where the extension code (and updated code) is manually vetted for malware and privacy violations. > Recommended extensions are expected to: Function extremely well. All Recommended extensions should not only perform as they promise, but do so at an exceptional level. For instance, there may be many ad blockers out there, but not all ad blockers are equally effective. Be safe and secure. Recommended extensions undergo full code review by staff security experts to provide a strong additional security check. Provide a delightful experience. Recommended extensions should embody great design and user experience standards. https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-recommended-extensions/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-recomme...

Forgeties79 3y ago
It’s honestly things like this that make me respect (more than I already do) and stick with Firefox. They do not need to do that and in a lot of ways it’s just sticking their neck out for other developers/their users for very little gain on their part. Obviously, there are some benefits for them, but I think most people would agree that it’s mainly a risk at the end of the day.
- hackernewds 3y ago
  with enough market share, if Google did this they would be cursed with numerous lawsuits for preferential selection and sued successfully
  - GeekyBear 3y ago
    > with enough market share, if Google did this they would be cursed with numerous lawsuits for preferential selection and sued successfully Google already has featured products on the Play Store, so preferential selection doesn't appear to be an issue. However, the likelihood of Google paying human beings to go over the code of a free extension looking for security and privacy violations is about zero.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - zelon88 3y ago
    If Google did this there would be no more extensions on Chrome store because they'd have to remove them all.
lupusreal 3y ago
I wish they'd only permit manually vetted FOSS extensions, separating developers (who might secretly sell out) from the ability to push updates directly to users. I want something like F-Droid or Debian but for browser extensions. In fact it's really disappointing that Mozilla goes out of their way to make it difficult for another organization to do this for Firefox. If you want to install extensions from a source other than Mozilla you need to jump through more hoops than doing the same on android...
- jraph 3y ago
  Some Firefox extensions are provided in the Debian repositories, maybe that's a start? I haven't tried much to use them, but maybe I should (though I'm not using Debian on the desktop right now).
- GeekyBear 3y ago
  > I wish they'd only permit manually vetted FOSS extensions, separating developers (who might secretly sell out) from the ability to push updates directly to users. The developer does have to supply access to the code and updates do have to be vetted before being pushed to users for an extension to be included in the recommended extensions program. This is a big advantage over Chromium based browsers, since we know that extension authors have sold their extension to less that scrupulous persons in the past who slip in malware without the user even knowing that a formerly well regarded extension has changed hands. I've seen more than one post on HN with extension developers revealing how common it is to get offers to buy out an extension with a large user base.
  - lupusreal 3y ago
    My point is that they shouldn't be publishing any extensions except those vetted extensions, or they should make it easier for another organization to publish extensions. Both Google and Mozilla publish unvetted extensions and consequently their extension "stores" are on the whole very sleazy.

Forgeties79 3y ago

It’s honestly things like this that make me respect (more than I already do) and stick with Firefox. They do not need to do that and in a lot of ways it’s just sticking their neck out for other developers/their users for very little gain on their part. Obviously, there are some benefits for them, but I think most people would agree that it’s mainly a risk at the end of the day.

hackernewds 3y ago
with enough market share, if Google did this they would be cursed with numerous lawsuits for preferential selection and sued successfully
- GeekyBear 3y ago
  > with enough market share, if Google did this they would be cursed with numerous lawsuits for preferential selection and sued successfully Google already has featured products on the Play Store, so preferential selection doesn't appear to be an issue. However, the likelihood of Google paying human beings to go over the code of a free extension looking for security and privacy violations is about zero.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- zelon88 3y ago
  If Google did this there would be no more extensions on Chrome store because they'd have to remove them all.

lupusreal 3y ago

I wish they'd only permit manually vetted FOSS extensions, separating developers (who might secretly sell out) from the ability to push updates directly to users. I want something like F-Droid or Debian but for browser extensions. In fact it's really disappointing that Mozilla goes out of their way to make it difficult for another organization to do this for Firefox. If you want to install extensions from a source other than Mozilla you need to jump through more hoops than doing the same on android...

jraph 3y ago
Some Firefox extensions are provided in the Debian repositories, maybe that's a start? I haven't tried much to use them, but maybe I should (though I'm not using Debian on the desktop right now).
GeekyBear 3y ago
> I wish they'd only permit manually vetted FOSS extensions, separating developers (who might secretly sell out) from the ability to push updates directly to users. The developer does have to supply access to the code and updates do have to be vetted before being pushed to users for an extension to be included in the recommended extensions program. This is a big advantage over Chromium based browsers, since we know that extension authors have sold their extension to less that scrupulous persons in the past who slip in malware without the user even knowing that a formerly well regarded extension has changed hands. I've seen more than one post on HN with extension developers revealing how common it is to get offers to buy out an extension with a large user base.
- lupusreal 3y ago
  My point is that they shouldn't be publishing any extensions except those vetted extensions, or they should make it easier for another organization to publish extensions. Both Google and Mozilla publish unvetted extensions and consequently their extension "stores" are on the whole very sleazy.