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

Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

blog.pushbullet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 811 posts

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#291

Post by jonas21 »

jaywalk wrote: post #121
AaronFriel wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome's Extension v3 API will remove the ability for uBlock Origin to filter web requests in code, instead the application will have to submit a list of URLs to filter to an internal API and this list has a maximum size and limits the flexibility of the URL filtering. See the uBlock Origin author's post: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss... This is ironic, because uBlock implements an extr…

> In fact, this change is meant to give developers a way to create safer and more performant ad blockers. Imagine anyone actually believing Google is trying to help ad blockers. What a dumb thing for them to even say.

Why? When Apple made the exact same change in Safari, they also gave these reasons, and everyone believed them.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#292

Post by danpalmer »

fgonzag wrote: post #274
danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

That's what you got out of it? Google doing a good job? They sent an email with no guidance whatsoever. These guys went above and beyond what most developers would've done, which would have been to contact support until they get a clear answer. This only alienates the extension ecosystem. And this was the primary reason I switched to Firefox. Google is the new Microsoft. If I remember correctly, they started Chrome e…

As mentioned, I think Google have handled it poorly, but their fundamental position – that this extension is incorrectly using permissions – was significantly correct and may prove to be fully correct.

Google deserve criticism for the lack of clarity in the communication, they deserve criticism for the lack of human touch, customer support and many other aspects.

They do not deserve criticism for calling out incorrect permissions usage and forcing developers to do better.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#293

Post by aGeekGoneMad »

jacobr1 wrote: post #213
colejohnson66 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the risk of losing your domain from a forgotten renewal?

I've used auto-renew ... but it turned out my biggest risk was actually the expiration data on my credit cards

That's we something like PayPal is nice, your cards can expire and be replaced without interruption to automatic payments. And like the email problem, you don't have to go around changing it every couple of years.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#294

Post by Arcsech »

This kind of thing just keeps. Coming. Up. from Google and between ML black boxes making arbitrary judgements and random product shutdowns, a hard requirement for any personal projects of mine is "no Google dependency", because it might vanish at any time, with zero notice or recourse.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#295

Post by lvs »

danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

Edit: I was the one who misread it. My mistake

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#296

Post by ViViDboarder »

awinter-py wrote: post #172
danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

Disagree that G's motivation here is to reduce permission footprint, because: - if G has the ability to automatically audit necessary permissions, they'd do it when you upload to the plugin store - if they're doing this manually for popular plugins, then (1) they'd publicly certify safe plugins and (2) the interaction would be way more high touch Plugins are inherently unsafe + require trusting the developer. Could b…

Also, Google could just block the permission and let the extension developers deal. Even that would be less hostile because at least the developers would know what to fix.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#297

Post by danpalmer »

Guzba wrote: post #69
danpalmer wrote: post #53

As much as we can criticise Google's handling of this situation, the fact that the developer was able to reduce permissions from accessing data on _all websites_ down to _their website_, as well as tighten up a few other permissions, shows that Google is correct that the extension is asking for more than it needs. I hope the developer finds another load of permissions they can tighten up, resubmits, and is approved.…

I really did try to call out the benefits that happened when I was told to "give permissions another look". Like all software, needs change and I was able to make a great improvement. The issue I have is that it's not clear if I'm even addressing the correct issue(s). If I don't make the Correct change, all other changes are irrelevant since they'll never get published.

Yeah, it's crap that they didn't give you guidance, although it seems like you managed to find plenty of issues quickly so perhaps the guidance is less necessary than it might seem.

Ultimately you know your extension, codebase, and use-case, far better than Google does, so it may not really be possible for them to give you the detail that you're looking for – you may be the only person who can do that.

I hope that they provide the support you need in understanding the problem to the point where the extension can continue to live on the Chrome store.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#298

Post by cpascal »

toohotatopic wrote: post #210
cpascal wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One worry about tying your identity to your own domain, is the security of your identity (aka your domain) hinges on the security of your registrar. If a bad actor can socially engineer their way into controlling your domain, your entire identity is compromised. Here's a blog post about this nightmare happening to someone: https://medium.com/@N/how-i-lost-my-50-000-twitter-username-...

So, which ones are the good registrars?

I use namecheap which has two-factor authentication, domain locks, and support pins.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#299

Post by crankylinuxuser »

sming wrote: post #10

the corporate gorilla beats its chest, demanding you comply! But with what, it does not say ¯\_(-_-)_/¯

The answer is to run a campaign to work with Firefox and Safari only, and convert all users to either platform.

Seriously, fuck google. I'm just done with them.

Re: Let's guess what Google requires in 14 days or they kill our extension

#300

Post by rampole »

Crazyontap wrote: post #28

This is a good extension but here is a cool hack I've discovered that let's you do this anywhere without any chrome extensions: - Create a new whatsgroupp called 'ping self' and add your friend to it. - Then kick your friend out from this group - Open web.whatsapp.com and now you can access your messages, files, photos across any device anywhere, anytime! (telegram also does this and allows file up to 1gb)

What about SMS from desktop?
Post reply on HN