3 ms·

> I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data. To be honest, to me it sounds like you don't want browser extensions then

> I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data. To be honest, to me it sounds like you don't want browser extensions then. To me, directly messing with web page data and browser behaviour is the whole point of a browser extension - what else is a browser extension for?

lxgr 1mo ago
Why should there not be a middle ground between “can do absolutely everything with all my data” and “is basically a glorified bookmark button” based on the level of trust I have for an extension?
- inigyou 1mo ago
  Because the browser already has bookmark buttons
- mzajc 1mo ago
  Because security is the pretext, not the goal here. I'm sure browsers could have better security controls for extensions, but giving users extra control over software doesn't seem to be very popular among corpos nowadays.
- account42 1mo ago
  Because the middle ground would require the browser defining what an extension can and cannot do which defeats the entire point of extensions.
matheusmoreira 1mo ago
The purpose of browser extensions is to build up an install base then sell out to some corporation that then promptly leverages that user base to exfiltrate data and monetize it. No thanks. They should have to declare to the browser what it is they want done instead.
- jamesnorden 1mo ago
  It still sounds like you don't want browser extensions then.
- tmgldn 1mo ago
  This point would be far more credible if browsers weren't in business to do what you claimed extensions are there to do. I'd also argue that creating a full browser without a profit motive is more unrealistic than creating an extension and uploading it - for free - to a web store.
  - glenstein 1mo ago
    Right, basically no web browser has a profitable business model except through licensing or being subsidized through some other branch of the business. The best pure browser company in history was Opera, and they didn't fail because they weren't innovating. It is simply not a survivable model. People don't remember anything, but during Google's recent anti trust case, one floated "solution" was to spin Chrome off as a separate company, but that was regarded as unrealistic partly because such a company would not have a credible path to profitability separate from Google. I happen to disagree, they could have collected a search licensing fee just like Firefox but that model is already being regarded as monopoly adjacent.
    - fzeroracer 1mo ago
      FYI, Opera didn't fail as much as they sold out. It was still sustainable, but the former founder/CEO left over this spat and formed Vivaldi over it.
      - glenstein 1mo ago
        Thanks, that's good info. I found this thread from an ex Opera employee and to your point, they could have kept on with Presto, but didn't [1]. What remains true is that bad management chased profits and found a better path to more revenue by caving to webkit and Chromium. So it wasn't strictly unsustainable so much as outcompeted by better economics that came from abandoning Presto. I consider the soul of Opera to be gone at this point and the amount of personal integrity and vision it takes to swim against the current of short term revenue is another manifestation of unfavourable browser economics for sustaining an independent engine. 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/3jxud3/exopera_developer_on_the_demise_of_the_presto/ https://old.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/3jxud3/exoper...

lxgr 1mo ago

Why should there not be a middle ground between “can do absolutely everything with all my data” and “is basically a glorified bookmark button” based on the level of trust I have for an extension?

inigyou 1mo ago
Because the browser already has bookmark buttons
mzajc 1mo ago
Because security is the pretext, not the goal here. I'm sure browsers could have better security controls for extensions, but giving users extra control over software doesn't seem to be very popular among corpos nowadays.
account42 1mo ago
Because the middle ground would require the browser defining what an extension can and cannot do which defeats the entire point of extensions.

matheusmoreira 1mo ago

The purpose of browser extensions is to build up an install base then sell out to some corporation that then promptly leverages that user base to exfiltrate data and monetize it. No thanks. They should have to declare to the browser what it is they want done instead.

jamesnorden 1mo ago
It still sounds like you don't want browser extensions then.
tmgldn 1mo ago
This point would be far more credible if browsers weren't in business to do what you claimed extensions are there to do. I'd also argue that creating a full browser without a profit motive is more unrealistic than creating an extension and uploading it - for free - to a web store.
- glenstein 1mo ago
  Right, basically no web browser has a profitable business model except through licensing or being subsidized through some other branch of the business. The best pure browser company in history was Opera, and they didn't fail because they weren't innovating. It is simply not a survivable model. People don't remember anything, but during Google's recent anti trust case, one floated "solution" was to spin Chrome off as a separate company, but that was regarded as unrealistic partly because such a company would not have a credible path to profitability separate from Google. I happen to disagree, they could have collected a search licensing fee just like Firefox but that model is already being regarded as monopoly adjacent.
  - fzeroracer 1mo ago
    FYI, Opera didn't fail as much as they sold out. It was still sustainable, but the former founder/CEO left over this spat and formed Vivaldi over it.
    - glenstein 1mo ago
      Thanks, that's good info. I found this thread from an ex Opera employee and to your point, they could have kept on with Presto, but didn't [1]. What remains true is that bad management chased profits and found a better path to more revenue by caving to webkit and Chromium. So it wasn't strictly unsustainable so much as outcompeted by better economics that came from abandoning Presto. I consider the soul of Opera to be gone at this point and the amount of personal integrity and vision it takes to swim against the current of short term revenue is another manifestation of unfavourable browser economics for sustaining an independent engine. 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/3jxud3/exopera_developer_on_the_demise_of_the_presto/ https://old.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/3jxud3/exoper...