Was casually reading through Firefox release notes for version 115, and in “Changes” section there is an introduction of a new back-end feature that restricts extensions behavior
We have introduced a new back-end feature to only allow some extensions monitored by Mozilla to run on specific websites for various reasons, including security concerns.
This feature is obviously still under development, but it already forced people to look for fixes. This suggests the user-unfriendliness of this feature, which may be related to the goals that the infamous Web Integrity API is seeking: partly, controlling and limiting extensions, which are there for the community(!)
I, of course, understand that this update dates back to 4th of July 2023 - some time before this DRM-the-web thing exploded, but still it contradicts things that Mozilla stated in opposition of Google’s plan to hijack [even more] the internet.
How long before the YouTube page will be too private, sensitive and important to allow uBlock Origin from running on it? Will Mozilla decide that youtube.com is “quarantined domain” or will it accept suggestions from its monopoly colleagues?
This feature bug can be fixed by going to about:config and setting “extensions.quarantinedDomains.enabled” to “False”. For now.
Not trying to make a fuss and/or cause a hysteria, just pointing out that such a thing was introduced and slipped under the radar (haven’t seen a discussion about this on the internet). Mozilla may have other intentions for it, but it doesn’t look like something made truly “for the people, not for profit” as some of Mozilla’s slogans state.
Will be happy to discuss.
EDIT: “uBlock” > “uBlock Origin”
Been writing these from Librewolf all along. I am in no way against progress. Instead, I am simply taking it like handles of a pot on a stove - not sure if it’s red hot or pleasantly warm. I am indescribably glad that extensions will no longer, knowingly or unknowingly, watch porn with me, but you can’t ignore the fact that, sometimes, things introduced, as awesome as they may seem, may not be used how God intended them. I’m sure Mozilla have all the best intentions regarding this, but, as I wouldn’t trust a stranger with a pocket knife (a tool that can be used as a weapon), I won’t trust Mozilla not to abuse this feature. I apologize once again for being hyperbolic and theatrical in my original post - that’s just how I write. I’ve been using Firefox, including forks, since forever and won’t abandon them just for a suspicion. As I said, I will be watching this thing grow hoping that this suspicion of mine will remain just that.
I’m not asking this facetiously but truly curious; Have you ever witnessed a single Firefox feature designed to harm your web experience? I don’t mean telemetry, etc but blocking ad blockers, forcing you to view ads, etc. I’ve been using Firefox for over 20 years, since it was named Phoenix and can’t think of a single example similar to the vein of your OP.
No. I have never witnessed Mozilla being evil. But there is first time for everything, right? They must be, maybe not entirely good - no such thing - but less evil than many other entities out there. Just trying to be cautious.
You’ve seemingly moved from “cautious” to “paranoid”, though.
Guilty. Although I sometimes give myself a wake-up slap.