3 ms·

What is more interesting is the reaction from the developer himself. He seems to be completely unimpressed by the criticism. Noting that one permits Chrome ex

by Svip 13y ago

What is more interesting is the reaction from the developer himself. He seems to be completely unimpressed by the criticism. Noting that one permits Chrome extensions to do stuff, and they would have seen this permission the extension required when they updated or installed it. Furthermore, he is quoted as joking about how he could have sold the extension to someone to get your passwords and whatnot (but ensures us that he hasn't done so).

shurcooL 13y ago
That is interesting. It could be criticism of the existing system. Or he could have other goals/intentions.
- Svip 13y ago
  He asks specifically if he has broken some rules in Google Chrome's terms of service, where another user replies with quotations from the ToS. He barks at that saying his extension is allowed to do what he does, because his extension does reveal exactly what it does, if you read its permissions carefully. Although, I cannot confirm whether that is true, but that's what he is saying. I have no idea what he is up to; but aren't extensions supposed to be reviewed if they in the extension catalogue?
  - darklrd 13y ago
    They seem to have an automated review process unless the extension is flagged for manual review. Source - https://developers.google.com/chrome/web-store/faq#faq-gen-08 https://developers.google.com/chrome/web-store/faq#faq-gen-0....
    - tomswartz07 13y ago
      In my experience, the review is only for the first upload. Updates don't seem to be reviewed?
    - tomswartz07 13y ago
      In my experience, the review is only for the first upload. Updates don't seem to be reviewed?
    - bronsoja 13y ago
      Yeah, seems like they should maybe institute some type of manual review for any type of "global" permissions. It would impede the well-behaving apps that legitimately need global permissions, but it might be worth it.
      - aragot 13y ago
        ... or incentive them not to request universe permissions.
  - Cthulhu_ 13y ago
    He does indicate the user gives the OK to 'access all data on all websites' - like most extensions do, come to think of it. I do think things like that should be more fine-grained, and/or that developers have to indicate /why/ they need that access.
    - edanm 13y ago
      Problem is, almost no user will ever actually READ any message. They'll just click "OK".
    - aragot 13y ago
      I really, really have a problems with this permission: - For a very few extensions, I allow it, but it is very clear that it is an open gateway for hackers, - Most often, I deeply regret I can't even tell Chrome that I allow the extension on a subset of sites... At least not my gmail please... - So the base rule is, never install something which requires all perms, obviously. Users have been warned properly. They're at the mercy of untrustable people.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

by Svip 13y ago

shurcooL 13y ago

That is interesting. It could be criticism of the existing system. Or he could have other goals/intentions.

Svip 13y ago
He asks specifically if he has broken some rules in Google Chrome's terms of service, where another user replies with quotations from the ToS. He barks at that saying his extension is allowed to do what he does, because his extension does reveal exactly what it does, if you read its permissions carefully. Although, I cannot confirm whether that is true, but that's what he is saying. I have no idea what he is up to; but aren't extensions supposed to be reviewed if they in the extension catalogue?
- darklrd 13y ago
  They seem to have an automated review process unless the extension is flagged for manual review. Source - https://developers.google.com/chrome/web-store/faq#faq-gen-08 https://developers.google.com/chrome/web-store/faq#faq-gen-0....
  - tomswartz07 13y ago
    In my experience, the review is only for the first upload. Updates don't seem to be reviewed?
  - tomswartz07 13y ago
    In my experience, the review is only for the first upload. Updates don't seem to be reviewed?
  - bronsoja 13y ago
    Yeah, seems like they should maybe institute some type of manual review for any type of "global" permissions. It would impede the well-behaving apps that legitimately need global permissions, but it might be worth it.
    - aragot 13y ago
      ... or incentive them not to request universe permissions.
- Cthulhu_ 13y ago
  He does indicate the user gives the OK to 'access all data on all websites' - like most extensions do, come to think of it. I do think things like that should be more fine-grained, and/or that developers have to indicate /why/ they need that access.
  - edanm 13y ago
    Problem is, almost no user will ever actually READ any message. They'll just click "OK".
  - aragot 13y ago
    I really, really have a problems with this permission: - For a very few extensions, I allow it, but it is very clear that it is an open gateway for hackers, - Most often, I deeply regret I can't even tell Chrome that I allow the extension on a subset of sites... At least not my gmail please... - So the base rule is, never install something which requires all perms, obviously. Users have been warned properly. They're at the mercy of untrustable people.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]