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

Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 448 posts

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#221

Post by blep-arsh »

vbezhenar wrote: post #196
BurnGpuBurn wrote: post #112

The biggest advertising company in history tries to kill blocking advertisements in their browser? How am I not surprised. I bet this move is also to kill the workings of extensions like DecentralEyes and others that try to protect users from being tracked. The whole changing of the API into a "sure we'll block that URL for ya, sometimes maybe" model reeks of increasing user tracking. They'll work out the kinks to le…

They are not trying to kill advertisements. They want to replace API to provide better performance. That's about it. ad blocking extensions won't disappear. May be some will, and new extensions emerge.

Incidentally these new declarative rulesets are useless against some very simple tricks. I know people who are working full time on defeating ad blockers and the new Manifest v3 seems to have made their lives so much easier.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#222

Post by bnegreve »

cletus wrote: post #157

Did anyone actually read the submission? The title is clickbait that doesn't reflect the content. The change here moves modifying content of the webRequest to the browser from the extension. This is fundamentally more secure. Allowing third-party extensions to inspect and _modify_ arbitrary HTTP requests is nothing short of dangerous. The new declarative API (from the article) limits such extensions to 30,000 rules.…

> So rather than be alarmist [..] we should be pushing for changes that make this workable

If, as the author suspects, the intent is to break popular adblockers, I have no interest in trying to make this workable.

Personally, I think this is a typical half-legit move: there's a good intention (security) but it's also hard to believe they did not realize that by pushing these changes, they were going to break several of the most popular extensions available. And, that the direct impact of this would be that for a short moment (at best) many more ads were going to be displayed on Chrome.

I think we've seen a lot of these half legit moves recently (apple battery scandal?). So I'm starting to be more and more suspicious.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#223

Post by NeedMoreTea »

ifdefdebug wrote: post #149
9dl wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did it like this Install FF Set it as default Change path on desktop shortcut for "Internet" to FF And ofc do not forget to say that is new IE version

> And ofc do not forget to say that is new IE version That's just plain dumb. Explain to your users what you are doing. You seem to think they are stupid, well they are not.

No they are not, they just frequently devoted their intelligence to being a lawyer, doctor or whatever rather than caring about tech. Any more than they cared about the finer points of their microwave or VHS recorder.

The first Google scam - yes scam - was Adsense and adwords. The search "sponsored" box was a yellow designed to be near indistinguishable from white, and was invisible on many LCD monitors. Adsense and adword links were the same blue IE used for links - because people had been conditioned to believe blue links simply traversed the web.

With hindsight, that's the moment everyone should have lost all trust in Google.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#224

Post by wffurr »

Half of all detected malicious extensions used the web request API to spy on users.

The rule limit has already been raised to 150,000.

Plenty of ad blockers will still work in Chrome.

This thread is chock full of motivated reasoning and deliberate misinformation.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#225

Post by dmos62 »

moomin wrote: post #15

This is the point in the dominance cycle where the dominant player decides they no longer need to be the fastest or the most secure and that their dominance will allow them to coast along doing their thing. There’s nothing particularly inevitable about what happens next, but let’s hope they get an IE6-sized kick in the teeth.

> IE6-sized kick in the teeth Sorry to distract, but I'd like this on a T-shirt.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#226

Post by blep-arsh »

cletus wrote: post #157

Did anyone actually read the submission? The title is clickbait that doesn't reflect the content. The change here moves modifying content of the webRequest to the browser from the extension. This is fundamentally more secure. Allowing third-party extensions to inspect and _modify_ arbitrary HTTP requests is nothing short of dangerous. The new declarative API (from the article) limits such extensions to 30,000 rules.…

30K is just not enough. Intercepting requests is still possible, just not blocking. Extensions have been already abusing this, of course. It's fiendishly difficult to prevent e.g. corporate users from leaking the whole intranet to SimilarWeb unless you completely disable browser extensions.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#227

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

geitir wrote: post #209
rusk wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

has anyone else noticed a marked decline in the quality of Google search results over the last 12 months? I swear, around about 2011 I thought Google was going to become self aware but it's declined from that high-point to a point where duckduckgo has become a viable alternative for more than just reasons of privacy. Which is a great thing! Turns out "Don't be Evil" was more than just a feel-good marketing slogan. It…

I don't know about overall quality of search, but did stack overflow do something to fall out of Google's good graces? I swear unless I specifically include stack overflow in my search query it's either near the bottom or not include at all. Instead it's a whole bunch of articles from independent websites. This is for questions I know fit the bill for stack overflow too. It's almost like Google is artificial lowering…

No repro here.

Google knows I land on StackOverflow results so often that SO results appear near the top, if not the #1 result, for terms that often have nothing to do with programming or computers. I was recently looking for an online thesaurus service and Google showed me an SO post about building linguistic/semantic search algorithms. Hmmm.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#228

Post by gjm11 »

sametmax wrote: post #150
goatinaboat wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Hello, fellow developers! I myself am a developer, just like you! How’s everyone developing today? By the way ” It’s so transparent, I boggle at how anyone falls for it, or that companies still think it is a viable strategy.

They do that because it works. I remember clearly an interview of a very famous IT billionaire going this way: - What's the most annoying myth about you? - A myth migh be that I'm the most generous philantropist of all time. [...But] I havent' sacrified my time or economic well being the same way lots of unamed, amazing people do. So they're the worlds best philantropists. This is the least subtle humble-brag of all…

Except that people do, in fact, say things not so far from "Bill Gates is the most generous philanthropist of all time". If you put "most generous philanthropist of all time" into your favourite search engine, I bet you will get a lot of top-N lists and I bet Bill Gates will be in all of them. (Unless they're things like "most generous philanthropists you've never heard of", "most generous female philanthropists", etc.) If I put that exact phrase, in quotation marks, into Google, the result I get up at the top is an article from 2007 (so, well before that interview) making that exact claim. [EDITED to add:] More precisely, it calls him "perhaps the most generous philanthropist of all time".

I don't think it really counts as a humblebrag to say "it's a myth that I'm X" when there are in fact a lot of people saying you're X.

He could, for sure, have gone further out of his way to avoid humblebragging: he could have said something like "I think a lot of people overstate how generous a philanthropist I am". But he was asked, specifically, what the most annoying myth about him was, and all the anti-humblebrag tactics I can think of right now avoid humblebragging by not stating a specific proposition at all -- so they fail to answer the question he was actually asked.

And he could, for sure, have picked something else, maybe something about his time at Microsoft. But these days he's much better known as a philanthropist than as a Microsoft founder or executive, and I bet the things people (truly or falsely) believe about his Microsoft career aren't the things he considers the most annoying myths.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#229

Post by hobs »

saagarjha wrote: post #183
appleflaxen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

his actions show he is disingenuous. you don't need to make any value judgements because his actions are inconsistent with his rhetoric.

I have found that picking at people for a decision that you don’t agree with is rarely useful; we already have people going through GitHub to find instances of other “disingenuous” behavior. Like the decision or not, the change is the product of an entire team at Google, and it’s not productive to harass the one person mentioned here because they’re an easy target.

They are literally the face of this decision - if you find yourself put in a position to make hard decisions you dont agree with, there's an easy out.

Get a new job.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#230

Post by chatmasta »

darkwater wrote: post #63
hechang1997 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many many people use adblockers now. The amount of users they will alienate would be very high.

Nope, mostly tech-savvy people use adblockers, it's astonishing how many people still see ads on a daily basis.

According to stats I’ve seen, around 30% of people use ad blockers. And that’s growing. Nobody stops using an ad blocker.

It’s not just tech savvy people. I imagine plenty of people here have set one up for their family members.

Post reply on HN