LinkedIn checks for 2953 browser extensions • Hacker News Board

Re: LinkedIn checks for 2953 browser extensions

#261

Post by account42 » Mon, Feb 09, 2026, 10:39 AM UTC

maples37 wrote: post #84

b112 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but how long are the extension ids? And if they are random, how long to scan a trillion random alphanumeric ids, to find matches? I presume the extension knows when it wants to access resources of its own. But random javascript, doesn't.

The extension IDs are UUIDs/GUIDs, so 128 bits of entropy. No site is going to be able to successfully scan that full range.

UUIDs are 128 bit long but generally have a bit less entropy than that as they are not just a random number. Still more than enough to make enumeration infeasible though.

Re: LinkedIn checks for 2953 browser extensions

#262

Post by mosselman » Mon, Feb 09, 2026, 1:29 PM UTC

cxr wrote: post #257

mosselman wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I read a lot of comments like these one you are responding on HN. It seems like there is a type of person who thinks that writing down what their rules are has some magical power. “This isn’t what it was intended for”. Who cares? A long long time ago in a galaxy far far away I would encounter warnings on pirating websites saying “If you are an FBI agent you are not allowed to continue on this site”. Imagine t…

I'd ask who you think you have me confused for or where you got that quote from, but I know how little it matters insofar as getting you to recognize whatever delusion led to your comment.

I am sorry, I wasn't reacting to you I was reacting to the commenter who said:

"Programmers don't appreciate the fact that you can just violate terms of service."

Re: LinkedIn checks for 2953 browser extensions

#263

Post by cxr » Sun, Feb 15, 2026, 4:17 PM UTC

mosselman wrote: post #262

cxr wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd ask who you think you have me confused for or where you got that quote from, but I know how little it matters insofar as getting you to recognize whatever delusion led to your comment.

I am sorry, I wasn't reacting to you I was reacting to the commenter who said: "Programmers don't appreciate the fact that you can just violate terms of service."

> comments like these one you are responding

That's my comment.