Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.pushbullet.com

381–390 of 811 posts

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

#381
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bit that improves user’s privacy is pro-consumer. The bit that removes user’s access to products is anti-consumer.

You can freely sideload any Chrome extension it doesn't have to be on the Chrome Web Store

[deleted]

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

#382

Another long-term PushBullet customer here. Anyone at Google who is listening- this kind of behavior kills my desire to continue using your products dead. I need functionality, of the type PushBullet has provided for years, to do my work. The recent nerfing of ublock origin has already had me feeling iffy on things. Behavior like this is simply unacceptable. If you want people to use your services, you need to have s…

Can you elaborate on the ublock origin nerf?

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

#383

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.…

Extension developers monetizing their extensions by selling the data that they get from users is a big problem. It's the reason that I don't freely install useful extensions that I find today. I have no way to distinguish those who sell my data from those who dont. I love that Google is starting to solve this problem, and from my perspective an extension that is sending and receiving SMS messages should not be reques…

"Solve the problem" ok, so you're starting that this selling only happens when a third party dev does it?

Do You have an android phone? Do You use google for anything? Gmail? Google docs/drive? Youtube? Chrome? ChromeOS? Anything google owns? Then they're selling your data.

Try reading all those fun TOS agreements that come with using any of the aformentioned products, or heck, visiting sites that use google analytics.that won't tell you how much or what data google gets from you, but it'll tell you that you agreed to it.

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

#384
post #337
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused - Firefox and Chrome act completely identically to a self signed cert for me. Both let me click through after looking at the cert or expanding a section. I have never been "blocked" by some hidden modal unless the site chooses to be HSTS-enforcing, and in that case Firefox does not allow a clickthrough either. Both examples on latest current, taken right now: Firefox: https://i.imgur.com/4VMjDZ4.png Chro…

Youre confused because you're not using Chrome on OSX: on osx there's no "Proceed to " option.

https://support.google.com/chrome/thread/23226743?hl=en

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

#385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally trust the major cloud providers a bit more than the companies focused on acting as a domain registrar. The domain registrars are generally a race to the bottom and focused on "add-on" sales as most people are shopping on price and that's going to reflect in the overall quality of the things that most people don't really notice like, y'know, security and validation. You don't hear a lot of stories about Am…

So use Google or Microsoft to register your domain? Doesn't that bring us back to the same potential problem though?

I think the idea is to use their "enterprise", paid offerings as opposed to relying on the "free" services that Google or Microsoft offer.

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

#386
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is a trivially easy product to switch off of compared to other Google properties like Gmail and YouTube. Have you tried Firefox recently?

I switched when Google killed of ublock origin in Chrome. Firefox is quite nice these days. I just use chrome for development because I'm more familiar with their dev tools. I will very occasionally find a site that's broken in Firefox and works in Chrome though.

uBlock Origin isn't killed. Some changes are proposed, however.

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

#387

Another long-term PushBullet customer here. Anyone at Google who is listening- this kind of behavior kills my desire to continue using your products dead. I need functionality, of the type PushBullet has provided for years, to do my work. The recent nerfing of ublock origin has already had me feeling iffy on things. Behavior like this is simply unacceptable. If you want people to use your services, you need to have s…

They blocked ublock origin?! Really?! What was their stated rationale (I assume they didn’t admit it is because they want people not to block ads)? Might I suggest using Firefox? I use it and don’t have any trouble with it.

It's not true.

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

#388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they did give details on what needs tightening, it's just that those details are in the form of policy points not being hit. What do you think they should be providing? Honest question, I have some ideas but they all feel very tricky/error prone to implement.

At the very, very least, they could identify which of the permissions are in violation and need to be made more restrictive, and which aren't. Someone at some point at Google clearly had that information when they decided to flag the extension, but Google's processes failed to ensure they communicated it. For the record, I actually agree with you that this is a good policy and will be a positive outcome for users. Bu…

Most of the discussion on this link is about how Google is being developer hostile. I think that's getting plenty of attention.

> At the very, very least, they could identify which of the permissions are in violation

If they've flagged this through user reports of the permissions being too wide then they may not actually know which permissions need to be changed. This is purely speculation though.

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

#389
> Once you have made these changes you may submit and publish a new draft in the Chrome Web Store Developer Dashboard.

> Your draft will then be reviewed for policy compliance. If the outcome of the review is successful, your existing store listing will get replaced by the approved draft. However, if the new draft fails to comply with our policies, both the draft and the existing store listing will be removed. Please note that the rectification window expires the moment a new draft is submitted. After this point, you will not be able to make iterative changes regardless of the days remaining in the warning period.

Holy fuck, that's insane. You get one shot; if you miss, game over.

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

#390
Counterpoint: there is a team within Google that got it right at least once. We have live import/export integration with Google Sheets and this requires additional OAuth scopes. The request for justification they sent was polite, specific about the scopes of concern (and why), and with no hard deadline. Our response was handled politely and promptly.

I realise the GCP API team may not be dealing with as big of a swamp as a consumer-facing apps group, but it was nevertheless one of those few occasions when Google left me with an impression other than overwhelming hubris. It was more like talking to AWS service teams, or Cisco TAC when you have a CCIE on staff.

Post reply on HN