You Know It’s Been a Bad Year When Even Firefox Resorts to Injecting Hidden Add-Ons

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by Minimalist, Dec 16, 2017.

  1. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    12,448
    Location:
    Here
    https://wccftech.com/firefox-damaged-user-trust-promote-mr-robot/
     
  2. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    7,189
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Not installed here... yet.
     
  3. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,322
    This has been boiling over at reddit for the last couple of days. Very ham-handed action by Mozilla causing them to lose some of the goodwill earned by Quantum.
     
  4. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    12,448
    Location:
    Here
    Yes I agree, not a good decision from Mozilla. Installing something without user consent can be considered as malicious by their users.

    I didn't notice it getting installed on my system, but since I use Sandboxie deleting all data after each session, I probably would missed it anyway.
     
  5. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    12,165
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Yes, they messed up, totally unacceptable stuff. What we need is a third party tool that can block browser extensions from being installed.
     
  6. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    658
    You mean some 3rd party extension to block mozillas extension?

    Because I don't see any other way how it could be done other than maybe hacking the
    mozilla source code itself and either removing extension support completely or doing a
    whitelist approach by user level (that's is each user decides what to allow and not mozilla)

    Mozilla itself does not seem to offer much help... checked with "extensions." filter from about:config
    and only interesting thing was extensions.blocklist.url (http://kb.mozillazine.org/Extensions.blocklist.url) that maybe could
    be leveraged by users to to block stuff they want (like this new mozilla extension).

    Another option is extensions.enabledAddons but I remember using it mostly for preinstalled extensions when porting firefox to my uClibc based liveCD
    long time ago .... so not sure if it's any use in this case.

    EDIT: Hmmm.... there are two interesting things extensions.update.enabled and extensions.update.autoUpdateDefault ... maybe juggling with these two settings users could stop mozilla pushing their stuff into their browser ... and also extensions.update.url ....hmmm... maybe if setting it to empty string ... but then users would have to manually check updates for their extensions ... of f*ck! Somebody else take a look I am too busy with my own browser right now....
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2017
  7. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    12,448
    Location:
    Here
    Chrome offers great option to set whitelisting mode for extensions using their group policy templates. It's one of features I miss now that I use Firefox.
     
  8. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,108
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Nothing really surprises me with Mozilla anymore.
     
  9. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,566
    I keep getting a new window that offers extensions. I'll have to look at those settings.
     
  10. Rainwalker

    Rainwalker Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Posts:
    2,439
    Location:
    USA
    And so many other things :(
     
  11. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,108
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I honestly thought things were improving at planet Mozilla. I must have been in a rare optimistic mood lol.
     
  12. JRViejo

    JRViejo Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    40,022
    Location:
    U.S.A.
  13. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,108
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    https://gizmodo.com/after-blowback-firefox-will-move-mr-robot-extension-t-1821354314

    “Our goal with the custom experience we created with Mr. Robot was to engage our users in a fun and unique way,” Mozilla’s chief marketing officer, Jascha Kaykas-Wolff, told Gizmodo. ~ op cit

    “Our goal with the custom experience we created was to engage our users in a fun and unique way by being honest and sincere with them, not data mining, nor doing anything considered or mistaken for anything underhand, surreptitious, furtive and sneaky.” Mozilla’s chief marketing officer, Jascha Kaykas-Wolff, told Gizmodo.

    There, fixed that for you Mr Jascha Kaykas-Wolff.
     
  14. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,173
    How can "pushing an add-on to users" be OK. As for "MY REALITY..." it's nothing other than agenda pushing. There's nothing benign about this.
     
  15. mood

    mood Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Posts:
    21,032
    Firefox is on a slippery slope
    https://drewdevault.com/2017/12/16/Firefox-is-on-a-slippery-slope.html
     
  16. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    7,189
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Maybe the reason it wasn't installed here is because I've gone to Options > Privacy and Security > scrolled down and unchecked all under Firefox Data Collection and Use, especially the middle one, Allow Firefox to install and run studies.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,812
    Mozilla have avoided criticism because up to now what they have been doing is facilitating as opposed to actively participating.
    Facilitating is extremely difficult to prove and only obvious to those who are scrutinizing and know what to look for.
     
  18. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    658
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2017
  19. MisterB

    MisterB Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Southern Rocky Mountains USA
    I'm currently running 52 ESR but I have had a couple of Linux installations that automatically updated to 57. The first one, about a month ago, broke almost all my extensions except Noscript. The second round a few days ago, went better. More extensions have updated to the new Firefox but I'm still not all that happy. The new Firefox does seem to be faster and smoother but I don't want to loose the extensions I've been using for years. 52 has all kinds of minor bugs and hangups with the new eBay server side code which is what I mainly use it for. Because of a fairly complicated printer setup where I've adapted an industrial printer designed to work with proprietary software to work with Firefox, I don't want to switch browsers and burn through another roll of labels before I get it working again. I'm hoping the new Firefox will work with the printer but I'm not in a hurry to test it. Shipping labels cost money. I haven't seen the extension but it is the least of my worries. Not having labels print correctly throws a big monkey wrench into my operation. An unwanted extension is easily disposed of.
     
  20. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    12,165
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Not an extension, but a tool that simply blocks extensions from being added. Weird that no HIPS that I know of offers this, perhaps because browsers made it hard to control?
     
  21. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    658
    If not from the inside of the browser with extension or some magic settings that could maybe found from about:config then the only option I could think of is route your firefox throught some filtering proxy (like privoxy) that runs on the same machine (or alternatively on your router) and then either keep track of bad extensions and block them or alternatively whitelist of extensions what to allow.
     
  22. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,909
    Location:
    USA
    Spade and nuder 101 delightful.
     
  23. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    12,165
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Aren't all extensions stored on disk? So if you could monitor this folder, you would think you could control extension loading.
     
  24. Fad

    Fad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Posts:
    441
    Location:
    England
    The amount of time and effort a user must spend on taming *fox is already beyond the pale - no casual user would likely know about it even less so doing it.

    I`ve said it before, [imo] Firefox started going downhill from version 4 and has continued to do so.....
    and the decline seems to have gained momentum somewhat over the past year or two.

    This does not surprise me whatsoever.
     
  25. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    658
    Hmmm...good point. Yes, installed extensions can be found under profile folder.
    (On Linux $HOME/.mozilla/firefox/somerandom_gibberish.default/extensions/ no clue what it is on Windows)

    So yes, that could be other way of blocking

    EDIT: That's with firefox 52 I don't know if they changed things with 57 ?
     
Loading...
  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.