Firefox disables all add-ons - Problem & Solution

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Mrkvonic, May 4, 2019.

  1. reasonablePrivacy

    reasonablePrivacy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    2,004
    Location:
    Member state of European Union
    Certificates weren't issued for not authorized person or for wrong domain. Privace keys weren't leaked. It is funny that expiration of certificate causes more outrage than certificate issuance policies and practices of Symantec.
     
  2. JohnBurns

    JohnBurns Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Posts:
    778
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    Looks like Edge Dev is going to gain on Firefox in a big hurry with Firefox problems like this.....I know I don't want to spend the time messing with it.
     
  3. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    It's fixed. Firefox updates to a released 66.04 and the problem is solved
     
  4. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    10,210
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    I agree.

    I never suggested anyone get fired. My only post in this thread suggested the blame shouldn't be put on any one individual.
     
  5. JohnBurns

    JohnBurns Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Posts:
    778
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    I use Tabliss as my start page and that's not fixed. Think it will take them a while to get all extensions back..one at a time.
     
  6. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    10,210
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Perhaps some extensions need to be uninstalled / reinstalled to get them to work?
     
  7. zapjb

    zapjb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Posts:
    5,554
    Location:
    USA still the best. But barely.
    Thank you for mentioning Tabliss. Never heard of it. Trying it now. It's working here. So far I like it. Some options wouldn't work but for example Unsplash does work.
     
  8. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    I had similar problem with uBlock Origin. At the end I had to refresh Firefox and install it again to sort this out.
     
  9. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
  10. Adric

    Adric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,761
    Did this problem supposedly affect everyone? I ask because on my Firefox 52.9 ESR, all addons are still fine and never got disabled.
     
  11. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    On one system I didn't encounter this problem on another I got addons disabled after whole day using browser without a problem.
     
  12. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    10,239
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    On macOS nothing was disabled, but on Linux I'd been using Firefox for quite a while when suddenly the extensions and theme disappeared. After the update fix came through on Ubuntu it was fine.
     
  13. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I had this problem in the past with Firefox, hated it. They shouldn't be able to automatically disable add-ons, but this was of course a quite serious issue and huge blunder. On the other hand, extensions can auto-update in Chromium based browsers, that's a problem too. With Firefox you can disable this, if I'm correct.
     
  14. reasonablePrivacy

    reasonablePrivacy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    2,004
    Location:
    Member state of European Union
    Why?
    What if malware would install trojan extension or override current extension with malicious code? It is relatively frequent way to sniff on user data nowadays. It is worth to note AV engines have poor sensitivity for that kind of threat. Shouldn't browser have some basic self-defense against that?
     
  15. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    If you have malware, then it doesn't need a browser extension to do what it does.
    Mrk
     
  16. reasonablePrivacy

    reasonablePrivacy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    2,004
    Location:
    Member state of European Union
    Yes, but AV are better at detecting binary library injections into process memory. Also browsers started to have self-defense against this behavior too.
    Keylogging and screen captures by traditional trojans are not enough to i.e. withdraw money from bank account, because of 2FA. They need to be inside browser to interfere with i.e. bank webpage.
     
  17. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    So if anything, you need to improve the os to prevent infections - not change the browser.

    You start with a premise that there is a problem, and that the browser somehow needs to works well in a problematic situation. I say, that's already game over. The solution is not to have a problem in the first place.

    Mrk
     
  18. reasonablePrivacy

    reasonablePrivacy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    2,004
    Location:
    Member state of European Union
    Unless malware elevates to SYSTEM/root or infects kernel, it is not game over.

    To prevent infections desktop OSes such as Gnu/Linux or Windows would need to be completely redesigned and rewritten. It means completely new OSes. Ironically this says person who is opposing minor backwards-compatibility breakages caused by Wayland adoption ;)
     
  19. Adric

    Adric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,761
    Apparently, if you had xpinstall.signatures.required set to false in your prefs config as I did, you weren't affected by this glitch.
     
  20. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    10,239
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Even with xpinstall.signatures.required set to false you still couldn't download and install other apps.
     
  21. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    Completely unrelated. Wayland brings no advantages to the user. None. Rewriting OS - maybe, why not.
    Mrk
     
  22. reasonablePrivacy

    reasonablePrivacy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Posts:
    2,004
    Location:
    Member state of European Union
    Yes, it is, but it is not a thread to discuss it.

    Anyway redesigning OSes that they will completely abandon backwards-compatibility is not an option for a multitude of reasons. Thus browser vendors must look at available means to minimize impact of malware on users to deal with current situation.
     
  23. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Yes this is true, there might be scenarios where it could protect people. But I like to stay in control of my PC at all times. This means that extensions should never be able to auto-update and that browser makers should never be able to disable or modify extensions that are installed. So this stuff should be optional.
     
  24. marinewonder

    marinewonder Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2019
    Posts:
    1
    Location:
    USA
    Has anyone confirmed if making extensions.json read-only actually works to make this fix more permanent?

    User IMDB had mentioned the read-only change earlier in this thread, though he was suggesting to change all instances:

    "and make sure you replace all of the "-1"s with "2" (no - before 2) and "true"s with "false" in that json file, there are more than one".

    With all due respect, I don't think all "true's" in extensions.json should be changed, there are visibility fields and others that are not related to this.

    But I'm wondering if anyone has tried to set the extensions file read-only and not had the extensions re-expire?

    The reason I ask is that I had tried doing that, but ended up hosing my firefox, unable to start, to the point I had to restore it from an older PC backup.

    Copied steps below from http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3049794

    Shut down Firefox
    Open extensions.json
    Replace all instances of "appDisabled":true to "appDisabled":false
    Replace all instances of "signedState":-1 to "signedState":2
    Save
    Change extensions.json to readonly or firefox will change everything back.
    start browser
    Disable and re-enable all extensions in about:addons
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.