this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024

0 points (NaN% liked)

Firefox

20311 readers

196 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Mozilla removes uBlock Origin Lite from Addon store. Developer stops developing Lite for Firefox; "it's worrisome what could happen to uBO in the future." (lemm.ee)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Mozilla recently removed every version of uBlock Origin Lite from their add-on store except for the oldest version.

Mozilla says a manual review flagged these issues:

Consent, specifically Nonexistent: For add-ons that collect or transmit user data, the user must be informed...

Your add-on contains minified, concatenated or otherwise machine-generated code. You need to provide the original sources...

uBlock Origin's developer gorhill refutes this with linked evidence.

Contrary to what these emails suggest, the source code files highlighted in the email:

Have nothing to do with data collection, there is no such thing anywhere in uBOL

There is no minified code in uBOL, and certainly none in the supposed faulty files

Even for people who did not prefer this add-on, the removal could have a chilling effect on uBlock Origin itself.

Incidentally, all the files reported as having issues are exactly the same files being used in uBO for years, and have been used in uBOL as well for over a year with no modification. Given this, it's worrisome what could happen to uBO in the future.

And gorhill notes uBO Lite had a purpose on Firefox, especially on mobile devices:

[T]here were people who preferred the Lite approach of uBOL, which was designed from the ground up to be an efficient suspendable extension, thus a good match for Firefox for Android.

New releases of uBO Lite do not have a Firefox extension; the last version of this coincides with gorhill's message. The Firefox addon page for uBO Lite is also gone.

top 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Reviving a long-dead thread for a relevant update, in a top-level post because you deleted all of your replies in the thread where it was relevant.

Mozilla did reply to my email asking for clarification on their Fakespot privacy policy, and whether they collect or sell user data, as we were discussing - though that reply took them four weeks. Their response in full:

""" Hello,

Thank you for contacting Mozilla and for your question. At this time, Fakespot does not sell or share any user data pursuant to any applicable privacy laws. The only data we share outside of Mozilla are generalized aggregated metrics with service providers who make Faksepot run to help us with logging and debugging issues to provide an uninterrupted experience for our customers, and we do not share this data for monetary gain. We are in the process of updating our privacy policy for additional clarity on all the points referenced in your email.

We trust this answers your questions and thank you again for reaching out.

Kind regards, Mozilla """

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

God, you're exhausting. They don't sell the data. Get over it. The email left no room for ambiguity. You're reaching so far it's embarrassing. Are you really that jaded?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My guess is that it was flagged by AI

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Migrating to librewolf right now. Fuck this shit

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There will be no Librewolf without Firefox though.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Isn’t it maintained independently?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Source code doesn’t magically disappear when the company who made it goes off the rails. LibreWolf will be just fine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So much for capitalizing on Chrome's missteps when it comes to ad blocking I guess

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

As the other commenter noted, this is kind of a nonsensical article. I am not by any means a fan of Mozilla's decision on Ublock, it seems egregious and indefensible. But the convoluted logic of making Manifest V3 about Mozilla is completely emptyhanded, and there's no rhyme, reason, logic, or precedent suggesting we should make anything of their absence of a statement.

Also, this is especially nuts because Mozilla HAS in fact criticized Manifest V3! They just happened not to have done so within a particular randomly selected window of time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

The article you linked makes a big deal about literally nothing. We've known Chrome was going to drop MV2 for years. We also know Firefox won't. There is nothing more they have to do or say about this situation. It doesn't affect Firefox whatsoever.

"Suspiciously silent" is such a bullshit nothing accusation to make. It is so obviously trying to capitalize on how many users have been (justifiably) turning on Mozilla as of late.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Mozilla says the addon has problems, the developer says it doesn't. Are there any 3rd parties that can weigh in on this?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

My own reading of the situation on the developer's GitHub is unfortunately that the review by Mozilla is indeed completely inaccurate in every way. No way to even read it as a "Each side has their own story" type of thing since they reproduce Mozilla's emails verbatim. They seem just materially incorrect. The source files referenced by the emails are visible on the same GitHub account, along with their complete histories showing no changes at all - the issues referenced don't and never did exist.

The only redeeming thing I can find is that the dev (ambiguously) seems to have never replied to the email from Mozilla about the issues, and so Mozilla was never made aware that there was an issue with the review that needed fixing. They seem to have done this because they perceived the process as hostile and not worth engaging with, which... fair, I guess.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I understand where the dev is coming from but I think he still should have just replied to Mozilla. This is clearly a mistake on their part. The dev just seems pissed off and decided to not reply out of emotion. His call I guess but I don't agree with that approach.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Edit: bloody hell, I hadn't looked into Brave that deeply yet, fuck Brendan Eich and fuck Peter Thiel.

Jesus. A day without bad news from Mozilla would be nice. I am beginning to feel a distinct need to switch browsers. ~~and Brave is currently looking like the best balance between compatibility and privacy. I've only been resistant to Brave because it's based on Chromium and~~ I want to support non-Chrome browser engines, but the Firefox forks I've tried like Waterfox and Pale Moon just aren't there yet in terms of usability for me (primarily, wide protocol support for web video playback).

Anyone got any better suggestions, by any chance?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Brave is currently looking like the best balance between compatibility and privacy.

Brave is the funding vehicle of a far right political activist. Fuck Brendan Eich, fuck Brave.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

deleted by creator