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

Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 396 posts

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#51

Post by Shank »

breezeTrowel wrote: post #43
Glench wrote: post #2

Wow, I kind of thought the headline would be an overstatement, but the article actually seems pretty even-handed and truthful in describing what's happening with Google's power over the browser market.

I, on the other hand, found the article to be terrible. Consider the following quote: > Manifest V3, or Mv3 for short, is outright harmful to privacy efforts. It will restrict the capabilities of web extensions—especially those that are designed to monitor, modify, and compute alongside the conversation your browser has with the websites you visit. Under the new specifications, extensions like these– like some privac…

> There was controversy over changes to the WebRequest API but that was two years ago and, I believe, changes have been made. Are there still changes that break functionality? What changes were made over the past two years? Have things gotten better or worse?

The WebRequest API’s blocking functions, which are central to the functionality of uBlock, are still slated to be removed.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#52

Post by Spivak »

danuker wrote: post #34
pkulak wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I needed them to do that so I could watch Netflix. Debate it all you want, but it made my life measurably better and I'm glad they did it. This would only negatively effect me (and everyone else).

How is your life measurably better, by comparing it with other people's fake and perfect and amazing lives (in Netflix videos)?

Because some people don’t find digital DVD rentals to be an affront to their freedom and just want to watch Squidgame?

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#53

Post by breezeTrowel »

rektide wrote: post #4

Previously extensions could be background pages, with access to DOM & Web Platform apis. MV3 currently reduces them to Service Workers, able to use far far far less capabilities. This is a massive massive downgrade for Extensions, unfathomable really. A Mozillaian proposed a less limited Limited Events Page but Google has snubbed it & not discussed. https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134 Extensions are force…

Have background pages ever had access to DOM? Usually all interaction with an observed tab is done through content scripts not background pages. Same goes for evaling JS code within the context of the inspected window.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#55

Post by dessant »

xxpor wrote: post #41
dessant wrote: post #7

I have a couple of popular extensions on the line, and I no longer see a way to stop Google without immediate government intervention. I am confident that they are not acting entirely in good faith, regardless of the much needed and useful parts of Manifest V3. They will get away with anything, be fined again in a couple of years for the growing list of illegalities they commit, and now they'll also harm the browser…

Where do people get this sense of entitlement from? Please cite one law you believe Google has broken.

> Where do people get this sense of entitlement from? Please cite one law you believe Google has broken.

Just like Amazon (your employer), Google has also been fined several times in the past decade for illegal business practices. Their illegal activities are extensively documented, and in some cases they were forced to change course due to regulatory intervention. Feel free to look it up, I don't think there is a need to relitigate objective reality.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#56

Post by bambax »

jsnell wrote: post #26

The security argument seems pretty simple. The end goal is that legit extensions that people regularly install should not need to ask for dangerous permissions, because a) it teaches the users that it's normal and b) since the extensions can become compromised later and abuse the permissions. Adblockers are probably the most common kind of extension, and are currently granted effectively unlimited access to read and…

> Adblockers are probably the most common kind of extension, and are currently granted effectively unlimited access to read and modify every single web page you use. That's fucking scary.

How is that scary?

The browser by definition has unlimited access to read and modify (and monitor) anything I do in it.

And I trust gorhill a million times more than any Google employee, past, present or future.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#57

Post by sonofhans »

breezeTrowel wrote: post #43
Glench wrote: post #2

Wow, I kind of thought the headline would be an overstatement, but the article actually seems pretty even-handed and truthful in describing what's happening with Google's power over the browser market.

I, on the other hand, found the article to be terrible. Consider the following quote: > Manifest V3, or Mv3 for short, is outright harmful to privacy efforts. It will restrict the capabilities of web extensions—especially those that are designed to monitor, modify, and compute alongside the conversation your browser has with the websites you visit. Under the new specifications, extensions like these– like some privac…

I agree with you. The article is terrible. It's a collection of reactions and scare quotes from industry figures. I followed the first few links in the article and they're not much better. You'd hope that EFF, of all people, would be able to make a simple and compelling summary of the issue.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#58

Post by bambax »

Spivak wrote: post #54
zdragnar wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari had the same concept first.

And ad blocking in Safari is fine, not great, but it works more or less.

Content blocking on iOS doesn't work properly, many many things go through. Is it better on the desktop?

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#59

Post by power78 »

donatj wrote: post #47

I miss the early days of Firefox extensions (circa 2004) where an extension could in very powerful ways completely change the layout/functionality of your browser; when they had near unlimited access to the XUL and could change anything and everything. I used a ton of very useful extensions then. Nested tabs were one of my favorites. These days I've got a password manager, a bookmark checker, and a tab manager I wrot…

I wish Firefox would have left the old extension abilities. They could have easily added the WebExtensions standard to allow for cross-browser compatibility and not removed the old functionality.

Re: Chrome users beware: Manifest v3 is deceitful and threatening

#60

Post by ianbutler »

jsnell wrote: post #26

The security argument seems pretty simple. The end goal is that legit extensions that people regularly install should not need to ask for dangerous permissions, because a) it teaches the users that it's normal and b) since the extensions can become compromised later and abuse the permissions. Adblockers are probably the most common kind of extension, and are currently granted effectively unlimited access to read and…

I, as an end user want to be able to install whatever dangerous software I want, especially as a power user. I understand the potential consequences and I don't want or need the handrails. Options and freedom are good. This is why browsers need to be split off from for profit organizations to be managed by entities that aren't concerned with the fallout if someone installs malicious software.
Post reply on HN