Here is my vision on Privacy. Let's say, I'm posting something at wilderssecurity, and I know that other members won't DOX me. And it's good for me. There are situations, when a "couple" is going through a (nasty) divorce, and any browsing history/habits could be exposed in some peculiar way. Or, someone is posting on some political web-site his/her/theirs opinion/s, while a tech company's "way-too-active" employee decides to "remotely" intervene, etc...
Everything I say is a lie. Except that... My school friend used to say, Everything in life is "poop". Except urine.
Let's take a closer look at a very respectful browser extension, Disconnect. From Vivaldi: Warning: Vivaldi cannot prevent extensions from recording your browsing history. From Disconnect web-site: We don’t sell your personal info to advertisers or other third parties - COOL! We share your personal info only when legally required, or when reasonably necessary to prevent harm in an emergency situation. We’ll share your Personal Info only to comply with laws or legally enforceable requests, to enforce our own rights and contracts with users or third parties, or to prevent harm to others and their property... -------------------- And that's from a highly respected, USA-based (San Francisco) Disconnect.
You might also want to check out this thread and then tell me if you still don't consider it to be a risk. Keep in mind these extensions were downloaded from the official Chrome and Mozilla extension stores. https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/the-case-for-limiting-your-browser-extensions.426670/
Okay, I read the two linked articles. I still do not consider the extensions I use or extensions in general as a serious security/privacy risk. Key word here is serious. Do I believe there is a risk? Of course there is. There is a risk in just being on the Internet. Those two add-ons mentioned in those articles are extensions I would never consider anyway.
All I'm saying is, the more extensions you are using, the bigger the chance you will encounter a malicious one, sooner or later.
the article on krebsonsecurity only focuses chrome extensions. in fact the chrome store - either apps or extension - is somehow critical, there exist not really a manual review as on AMO. and the extension system for firefox does not allow side loading from external sources, anything must be included. and scripts are special checked, either on code and on version. older jquery libs are not allowed for public releases. what also may happen that too many extensions slow down browsing performance and browser startup. on pretty modern hardware lesser, on older some more, in special without SSD. nevertheless there exists a poc how extensions can harm data of other extensions, thats why google introduced the extension feature for separating those processes. firefox got fission working, but not for extensions, that may come.
I agree with this. I am willing to accept this risk. I have actually encountered a "malicious" add-on. Mozilla disabled it because it was supposedly still sending user data even after after opting out of it in violation of Mozilla's polices. Blocked Add-ons If interested you can read on it here. [EXT] S3.Translator • mozillaZine Forums. (starts on page 41). Interestingly enough, in my search to find the name of this add-on I discovered it is now back in Mozilla Add-ons. I plan to give it a test run to see if it's as decent as it was before. On top of that the number of of translator Add-ons has increase a lot since I last checked. If the is S3 one doesn't pan out, I test out some others.
That risk is greatly minimized if you're using recommended add-ons in Firefox. EDIT: I should add that all new versions of those add-ons "must undergo a full technical review before it will appear on AMO" as well.
the author of S3 addons stood right before his kick off AMO with no return because he had inserted this opt-in/opt-out code for his personal research. it was nothing else but i conflicted Mozilla agreement so any addon was kicked off until he removed the code. since this he lost a bit focus of his extensions and updates got rare. the stats code from him was present a long time, i removed that crap any time after update. (addon signing was opt-out that time, i dropped any S3 with firefox 57 and mandatory signing for webextensions, too much work for less usage) such codes (!) are reason for raised security at AMO, in the past a lot of extension have been deleted for this. in the beginning of webextensions on AMO a lot of crap for illegal video/audio, *coin and more rushed in, they could not delete that fast as they came renewed in. then AMO started a better check and i think it works really good. for users who are not savvy on extensions should ask, anytime. dont hesitate.
OK cool that you are at least aware of it. Yes of course these are the most trustworthy extensions, too bad they don't perform this technical review with all extensions. And don't get me wrong, I'm also using about 7 extensions in Vivaldi, I just wish browser developers would make it more difficult for malicious extensions to operate. Currently they have got way too much abilities.
Yes exactly, but it's not clear how they are trying to achieve this and it will also limit ad-blockers. But I'm guessing it won't interfere with built-in adblockers, so I hope Vivaldi and Firefox will beef them up.
Mozilla is ending support for Firefox Lockwise November 20, 2021 https://www.ghacks.net/2021/11/20/mozilla-is-ending-support-for-firefox-lockwise/
I had to uninstall this extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/video-downloader/ from my daughter's Linux pc. Although particularly useful for streaming downloads in MP4 format, it uses the browser cache. In the pc Linux with 3 tabs of Firefox open I have 32% of RAM used (1.2 GB/3.8GB). My daughter tried to download a movie weighing 1.8GB which probably consumed all the RAM. Final problems before saving. No save button. Browser almost completely blocked. System almost completely paralyzed, probably because the HD always has a certain age. I have no idea if in a Windows OS everything would be more manageable. In chrome-based browsers I prefer to use another extension of the same kind which seems faster to me. But it is not available for Firefox.
I use yt-dlp (fork of youtube-dl) . Works perfectly fine. It's a command line program, but you can integrate it in the browsers context menu with the "Open With" extension.
https://altadefinizione.app/ The procedure 1) click mouse on the movie 2) choose video player (supervideo is the most reliable one) 3) continua come ospite 4) click the mouse to start streaming If you leave UBO active you obviously have to make some changes to use the website. The arrow displays the stream (of that movie) when the counter is at 530 allows you to download in MP4 format. Of course with such extensions you can also close the movie tab.(after the streaming capture has started).
Well, that gives: Code: Unsupported URL This has not yet been added to the enormous list of supported sites yet... You could open an issue at https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/new/choose (or I could do it for you) [Edit] If they have DRM, it will obviously not work.
There was a request for su I doubt if it will be accepted however... There was a request for support of this site over at the youtube-dl issue tracker on Nov 2019, but it was rejected because of this: https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube...e-or-site-which-shows-current-movies-for-free
Mozilla bans the FVD Speed Dial extension and removes it from Firefox; but users are furious after losing their bookmarks November 24, 2021 https://www.ghacks.net/2021/11/24/mozilla-bans-the-fvd-speed-dial-extension-from-firefox/
