logoalt Hacker News

chimeracoder10/01/20243 repliesview on HN

> But this is not about a high profile plugin. The high profile plugin is "uBlock Origin", and this is about "uBlock Origin Lite", which is a big thing for Chrome, but not for Firefox. Why would anyone want to use uBOL, when they have the option to use uBO?

uBlock Origin requires giving the extension full read and write permissions on every site you visit, which is a huge liability, security-wise.

uBlock Origin Lite uses Manifest V3, which doesn't require providing those permissions to the extension.

Perhaps you trust gorhill with that power, but it's pretty understandable why others might not want to give that power to a third party.


Replies

EasyMark10/01/2024

To have a reviewer under your employ that doesn’t know what UBO is or it’s dev, makes me feel pretty confident in siding with gorilla on this, but I hope that he does calm down a bit and put the extension back up.

show 2 replies
fwn10/05/2024

> Perhaps you trust gorhill with that power, but it's pretty understandable why others might not want to give that power to a third party.

I have been using the extension, now called ublock origin, for longer than I have been using the Firefox browser. Mozilla is the third party in this relationship.

In all those years, the extension project's principles were very strict, and the authors never disappointed. Mozilla, meanwhile, is just a constant stream of disappointments.

It's so many things, really. Magic opt-out tracking here and there, ads in new tab windows, nuking almost the entire extension ecosystem on Android for a couple of years just to grind down the user base, etc. It never ends.

You can also communicate with gorhill like a real person. Mozilla press communication is always a psychopathic mess of corporate speak. There is hardly anything in there.

I'm not even sure which project, ublock origin or Firefox, has more users by now.

My loyalties are pretty well sorted at this point.

zdragnar10/01/2024

This is exactly why Apple implemented the precursor to Chrome's v3 manifest in Safari (not to mention the performance implications).

It's a lot easier to just accuse Google of acting in bad faith, and Mozilla of being their lapdogs, and ignore any possible evidence to the contrary.

show 2 replies