Nuking all extensions that use any of the listed "monetization platforms" would make Chrome extension store a safer place for everyone.
Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
41–50 of 374 posts
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#42This one is interesting because it seems harmless, if not even helpful (Monitoring DNS errors). What am I missing here? "I’m sure you get business proposals all the time, so I’ll get straight to the point. I hope what I’m proposing is a little different and might actually interest you. I like Hover Zoom+ as a great alternative to it’s bigger brother Hover Zoom that lost its glamour over the last couple of months. We'…
My guess is either mapping out internal networks for nefarious purposes or finding expired/dead domains that still receive traffic.
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#43The root problem here is that there's no legitimate way to monetize browser extensions. Extensions are meant to be simple, so it's hard to sell premium features. Extensions usually don't "own" any space to embed ads in.
The root problem is that extensions are such a good platform for ads/tracking.
If monetization was better, it would just end up like Google Play, with adtech spam crowding out the "legitimately" monetized apps.
Dracionian restrictions on web access (like requiring a prompt whenever an extension wants to upload/download data) might help a little.
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#44I have an extension I wrote that is literally for a single regional website to do some extra blocking to get around a paywall. There are under 10 installs total. For some reason, the most recent monetization email I got thought it was 10,000. > I'm reaching out to discuss a unique monetization opportunity for your extension, , through our exclusive Premium Bing Hosted Product. > I'm thrilled to let you know that this…
You should counter by offering to sell them the whole thing for a flat price and then have all your users (you) switch to a new extension that does the same thing under a new name. :)
Okay, even better, to follow on another user's idea and up the ante:
Fake extensions created under burner dev accounts (w/ fake identities), astroturf the installs like crazy. Use ChatGPT to write the code, pump it out like chocolate out of Willy Wonka's Fudge Sludgefest.
Sell to scammers/info scalpers for a flat fee via a non-refundable route under a semi-reputable escrow, rinse and repeat.
The one downside is if you do that to somebody bad, and you've left any personal info out by accident....
Additionally, it's highly unethical. Don't do this. But it seems like 'easy money', the whole 'curse of maybe getting doxxed and XYZ from a sufficiently-motivated data thief' aside.
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#45This is so true. I receive these emails every week. I've even had offers about acquisition that I had to turn down. Having a "Featured" chrome extension does seem to attract a lot of these offers. The more emails/offers I receive, the more I'm convinced that I shouldn't give up the extension.
For those curious, here's the GitHub repo of my extension: https://github.com/mohnish/rearrange-tabs
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I may have misunderstood your prior comment so please excuse me if I got it wrong. The problem I was solving was how to make money from an extension that I publish. I was outlining different business models where you could give the user access to the extension, and make money without having to accept this arrangement with data thieves.
I don't see this as problem that needs to be solved. It is freeware from the start. It's wonderful that people are willing to share their knowledge and time for free - why not let it be the way it is?
I believe problem isn't the right word. I think OP is challenging your assumption that it's inherently freeware. There are methods for monetizing an extension and they're infrequently used or associated with a much larger experience (e.g. my BitWarden extension is critical for using BitWarden, but I pay for BitWarden's subscription elsewhere).
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#47The root problem here is that there's no legitimate way to monetize browser extensions. Extensions are meant to be simple, so it's hard to sell premium features. Extensions usually don't "own" any space to embed ads in.
Google could easily find a way to display ads for all extensions: pre-roll ads before extension launches, mid-roll ads when user is using extension for some period of time; not sure what is stopping them.
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#48The root problem here is that there's no legitimate way to monetize browser extensions. Extensions are meant to be simple, so it's hard to sell premium features. Extensions usually don't "own" any space to embed ads in.
There used to be.
https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/money/
"The web has come a long way in the 11 years since we launched the Chrome Web Store. Back then, we wanted to provide a way for developers to monetize their Web Store items. But in the years since, the ecosystem has grown and developers now have many payment-handling options available to them."
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#49Unbelievable how persistent redacted were over the years.
Oh, it didn't occour to me before but you could have so much for naming your child redacted.
Re: Temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer (2021)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you believe that if there was a way to monetize extentions devs would not be approached by data thives?
Not sure if sarcasm but will respond as if it's not. There are lots of business models to choose from - subscription - affiliate links - sponsors - one time charge, this one is tricky as restricting access requires a back-end that needs ongoing maintenance and server costs [edit: formatting, spelling]
> one time charge, this one is tricky as restricting access requires a back-end that needs ongoing maintenance and server costs
If a browser extension is allowed to use license keys (not sure on the various store rules i.r.t. browser extensions), you could create a timed license key that is cryptographically signed.
No back-end required for that.