3 ms·
This is really useful, although, as another commenter said, this should be a built-in feature. A question I got regarding this extension, as I didn't take a d
by redbell 3y ago
This is really useful, although, as another commenter said, this should be a built-in feature.
A question I got regarding this extension, as I didn't take a deep dive into the source code yet: Does it automatically notify you (not necessary in real-time but at least in startup) of ownership change or you need to manually trigger a check command?
A few months ago, a story on this topic was trending:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36233068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36233068
From the top comment of the above story:
"I think it would behoove Firefox and Chrome to change their policies around automatic extension upgrades in these scenarios: if an extension discloses a change in ownership, then upgrades should require user approval. If an extension fails to disclose a change in ownership, then users should be able to report it as malicious."
As a side note, probably the title should be prefixed by "Show HN"
- mfrisbie 3y agoCreator here. A check automatically runs every hour, and if there are any changes detected, a badge appears over the extension icon. I decided anything more than that was too invasive.
- redbell 3y agoIndeed, periodic checks with a well-thought-out interval do make sense. Well done!
- jtriangle 3y agoIt would be much better to at least have the option to automatically disable an extension with changed ownership instead. The majority of owner changes are going to be malicious, so the action taken should account for that.
- efreak 3y agoAre extensions allowed to disable other extensions? That seems like it would be a poor design. If the feature was part of the browser, then sure, but not as an extension.
- kylecordes 3y agoAdding such a speed bump where the user must explicitly approve the upgrade because of a change of ownership of the company that provides it, would leak a fair percentage of the users. This would decrease the value of the product/company when sold. User friendly, but creator (who has bills to pay) unfriendly.
- sfink 3y agoIt seems fair for the browser to charge a fee (in the form of losing a percentage of users) in exchange for money earned by stealing data from users. Creators do not get offered large sums of money by entities motivated by the desire to better serve the creator's users. So yes, I agree that it would decrease the value of selling out. I see that as a good thing. It fights against what is currently killing the extensions ecosystem for everyone.