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

261–270 of 392 posts

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

#261

Post by f4stjack »

Good move, congrats on surviving the second armag-add-on finally BUT I won't be moving from chromium until Firefox (or Mozilla) explains:

- why am I opted-in to a Studies program in Firefox's default state? (With no explicit information about what it is)

- what does app.normandy.enabled switch do and why is its default value is True and doesn't change to false when I explicitly state I don't want to be in the Studies program?

- why can't we see any xpi's installed by studies program unless we explicitly go to about:studies?

I don't say chromium is better, but I think we deserve an explanation regarding these points.

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

#262

Post by yabatopia »

wdr1 wrote: post #90

This is pretty bad for Firefox. I wonder how much people straight up & left for Chrome as a result of it.

I've switched to Vivaldi on my desktop and Brave on my smartphone. For now. It's been three days and I'm still waiting for an official release with the add-on fix, can't wait forever.

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

#263

Post by ptx »

floatingatoll wrote: post #218
Karunamon wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 en…

"Opt-out telemetry" creates precisely the scenario I describe, where the users who care most are least visible to Mozilla, at which point their needs would go unconsidered; no one knows they exist, how many of them there are, or why they're opting out. This remains true regardless of why , which negates your entire list of issues, replacing them with a simple question that is very difficult to answer: How could Mozil…

> "Opt-out telemetry" creates precisely the scenario I describe, where ... no one knows ... why they're opting out.

Telemetry doesn't tell you why users do anything. They would have to ask, which doesn't require telemetry. There used to be a form for submitting feedback.

> How could Mozilla respect the needs of users who opt-out of Mozilla knowing they, and their needs, exist at all?

Because of the values and principles that Mozilla used to share with its users, the principles that underpinned the first implemenation of Firefox Sync and were completely abandoned in the current implementation.

I trusted Mozilla because they didn't require our trust. They understood this principle and designed their systems in accordance with it.

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

#265

Post by Santosh83 »

fraudsyndrome wrote: post #258
wdr1 wrote: post #90

This is pretty bad for Firefox. I wonder how much people straight up & left for Chrome as a result of it.

I was on the reddit thread when it happened - was super confused as I just updated my firefox and it happened at a very similar time frame so I assumed it was from the update I personally found the issue trivial, my main addon is ublock origin. There was a workaround using about:debugging and installing UBO on there which worked so it's not like the fix was a long process. Being committed to a single browser, if anyo…

I too use only two extensions, uBlock Origin and HTTPS Everywhere and the hotfix pushed by Mozilla re-enabled them within half an hour of disabling. I do sympathise with those who apparently lost the settings of certain addons, notably Container based ones. Fortunately I always found the UX of Containers so clunky that I never bothered.

Sticking with Firefox as an open competition to the browser monopoly is critical now more than ever before.

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

#266

Post by eevee »

feanaro wrote: post #256
eevee wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "bizarre policy" was software signing, which is in fact a security feature. I don't understand what "getting their act together" means here, when you're posting it on an announcement that the problem has already been fixed. Should Firefox proactively remove all security features that risk ever posing some modicum of inconvenience to users? Because that would be... all of them.

Firefox could allow people to sign their own add-ons. Let's not pretend that the terms "software signing" and "walled garden" are synonymous.

Okay. Now malware addons are signed, and nothing has been accomplished.

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

#267

Post by 8bitsrule »

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 too lost my multi-containers and assignments. I was just reading this (2017) discussion: https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/3... and noticed mention of file 'containers.json', which I found in my current Firefox profile. It contains the descriptions of the containers I created since yesterday (for the 3rd time).

So it looks as though a manual backup of that (or the whole profile, knowing its in there) at least will end that chore.

But you still lose the Container -> websites associations. The same page recommends: "An effective way of exporting and importing containers safely is using ffcontainers."

The page for that syncer is here: https://github.com/pierlauro/ffcontainers ... but it's on hiatus at this moment.

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

#268

Post by curiousgal »

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.

I haven't installed an add-on in years.

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

#269

Post by feanaro »

eevee wrote: post #266
feanaro wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox could allow people to sign their own add-ons. Let's not pretend that the terms "software signing" and "walled garden" are synonymous.

Okay. Now malware addons are signed, and nothing has been accomplished.

In this scenario, malware add-ons would be signed only for that particular Firefox installation.

Essentially, I am arguing that Firefox should let you create your own signing key pair (which would be valid only on that single Firefox installation) and sign any add-on using it.

It's a large enough hoop that most users would not jump over it, not least because they would not know what they're doing, but it would be there for those who need it and relinquish the central point of failure that is the AMO.

The current situation is basically the Secure Boot fiasco all over again.

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

#270

Post by millstone »

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.

Is security the new motor powering the upgrade treadmill?

God knows how many vulnerabilities there are in the massively outdated Windows 7, why don't you upgrade to Windows 10...

Post reply on HN