Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

ftp.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 392 posts

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#201

Post by beezle »

roblabla wrote: post #178
beezle wrote: post #175

So nothing for those of us still running 56 beause Quantum trashed our extensions (and there are still not equivalent availale)?

Why on earth are you running such a massively outdated browser? You should at least switch to pale moon, basilisk, or another maintained browser. God knows how many vulnerabilities in the wild there are in 56.

I don't think I or anyone else need to justify why they still use the 56 ESR instead of pale moon nor does that have anything to do with the question of whether there will be a fix for this version from Mozilla.

Clearly a few feathers have been ruffled by even broaching the fact that many people still use the 56 version because crtical extensions still have no equivalent under quantum. Snark is not allowed even when asking a relevant question of whether there will be an update. Sad.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#202

Post by Karunamon »

floatingatoll wrote: post #116
user17843 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be possible to roughly deduct this from the following statistics during the next days/weeks: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/adblock-plus/... https://data.firefox.com

Note that these statistics would, presumably, exclude all users who disable telemetry in Firefox. Since many of those outraged at the interruption to addons seem to overlap frequently with those who object to and disable telemetry and studies on principle, their departure over this incident could well have no impact whatsoever on the metrics you linked above. It must be a nightmare for the Firefox team to have a mino…

Who's fault is that, at the end of the day?

Mozilla didn't have to structure their addon system in such a way that their (in)actions could disable the addons of every Firefox user on the planet.

Mozilla did not have to abuse the studies mechanism (also on by default) to ship a workaround.

Mozilla did not have to disable the option that would let me work around this problem by myself (which is going to cause me no end of fun when I get into work tomorrow). If the Firefox team thinks their development concessions are a pain in the ass, try being directly accountable for the repercussions, in the "I will be fired if I don't fix this", not the "I will be talked mean about on the internet if I don't fix this" senses.

Mozilla didn't have to bundle junk like Pocket and the now-scuppered Hello, both of which could have just as easily been addons suggested on first run.

Mozilla didn't have to push promotional addons (the Mr Robot thing) without my express prior consent.

I grow exceedingly weary of this narrative that Firefox is above all reproach and criticism because they produce a web browser.

How about this instead; if Mozilla wishes for its users to respect them, they can start by respecting their users. That means no opt-out telemetry period, no paternalism about what I can and cannot install, or what options I can change, and so forth.

I am beyond sick of this shit. I would love nothing more than a true third option for browsers right now. Firefox hates its users, Chrome sees them as cattle - what's left? I have to use one of the two and take ridiculous steps to cover my own interests, because neither of these companies have them in mind.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#203

Post by DiseasedBadger »

zapzupnz wrote: post #157
rnd0 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I've switched to waterfox -which is a fork of an older firefox branch, and it supports addons (at least the ones I use). I'm pretty happy with it, and I'm strongly considering staying with it even after firefox is fixed.

You'll be several revisions' worth of security patches behind. For an application that is usually one's main means of accessing the rest of the internet, that would be a deal-breaker for me.

But even more security bugs behind.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#204

Post by steve19 »

lugg wrote: post #182
Perceptes wrote: post #162

Did this issue cause all add-on data to be wiped? After updating to 66.0.4, all of the containers I'd created with the multi-account containers add-on were gone and replaced with what appeared to be a default set of containers. I spent a lot of time setting that up—is there no way to get it all back if I don't have some sort of manual backup? And if not, what files do I need to manually back up to make sure I don't l…

Containers are notoriously finicky datawise. I generally keep good backups of the non standard ~/.mozilla folder to compensate. I think it was issue 339 on GitHub. They basically explain they won't add it to sync data because there is no containers on mobile. https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/3...

I could never understand why they were not synced. Its so incredibly frustrating, and the official reason does not help.

I simply don't understand Mozilla anymore. The power users are also the unpaid evangelists/marketers. They seem determined to alienate this demographic while iOS'ifying Firefox for a general audience. Which is great and all until they realize they don't have a marketing budget to complete with Google and MSFT.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#205

Post by rpearl »

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #203
zapzupnz wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll be several revisions' worth of security patches behind. For an application that is usually one's main means of accessing the rest of the internet, that would be a deal-breaker for me.

But even more security bugs behind.

[citation needed]

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#206

Post by ilikepi »

Perceptes wrote: post #162

Did this issue cause all add-on data to be wiped? After updating to 66.0.4, all of the containers I'd created with the multi-account containers add-on were gone and replaced with what appeared to be a default set of containers. I spent a lot of time setting that up—is there no way to get it all back if I don't have some sort of manual backup? And if not, what files do I need to manually back up to make sure I don't l…

I found that the changes I made to container names and colors were reset, but my hostname assignments remained. I guess those were two different datasets and only one was reset.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#208

Post by rnd0 »

zapzupnz wrote: post #157
rnd0 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I've switched to waterfox -which is a fork of an older firefox branch, and it supports addons (at least the ones I use). I'm pretty happy with it, and I'm strongly considering staying with it even after firefox is fixed.

You'll be several revisions' worth of security patches behind. For an application that is usually one's main means of accessing the rest of the internet, that would be a deal-breaker for me.

In this case, I was more insecure being subjected to advertising networks (and the malware carried on them) because of Firefox's mistake which meant I wasn't able to load ublock origin. I'm also not sure how many of those "security patches" are intended to make my browsing experience safer, or simply meant to implement bizarre policies that might blow up in my face at any time (as this certificate issue has).

It's a trade off.

I assume (and hope) Firefox will eventually get their act together so I can go back to using it, but if not at least I don't have to jump ship to chrome.

Re: Firefox 66.0.4 is out, fixes disabled add-ons

#209

Post by solarkraft »

Yoric wrote: post #110
wvenable wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this also worked for me on Android. Not sure why the downvotes.

Probably because this workaround consists in deactivating add-on security.

And what's the problem with not having that? Does it suddenly make my installed extensions insecure?

I (somewhat) get it for the standard windows user who gives admin rights to everything, but I think this crowd is a bit more aware of what they install.

Post reply on HN