←back to thread

1318 points xvector | 10 comments | | HN request time: 0.409s | source | bottom
Show context
MrEldritch ◴[] No.19823726[source]
This is a goddamned disaster. I'm just thankful that I use an offline password manager, but even still ...

I like FF, don't get me wrong, but this is going to absolutely fucking destroy user trust in Mozilla. This kind of incompetence, on a browser scale, is breathtaking.

replies(7): >>19823747 #>>19823877 #>>19823883 #>>19823946 #>>19824062 #>>19824099 #>>19824204 #
1. unreal37 ◴[] No.19824099[source]
Seems like an over-reaction. "Destroy user trust in Mozilla?" Really? Because your extensions got disabled for a day?
replies(2): >>19824247 #>>19824485 #
2. yifanl ◴[] No.19824247[source]
Users will drop a product for the slightest reason. For instance, one of our users recently left a negative review. Paraphrasing, "Logging in is difficult".

We check our warning system (set up to detect suspicious logins, incidentally also catches any users who've been locked out because they forgot their password), and his last login attempt took a total of two tries.

replies(1): >>19825099 #
3. jchw ◴[] No.19824485[source]
(Big fat disclaimer: I work for Google. These are my opinions and not my employers. I don't work on browsers. I test my code in Firefox. Etc etc.)

Sadly, I have to agree that this feels like a big blow to user trust.

User trust is not really just about respect or values; it definitely also includes things like performance and reliability. The average user, right now feeling powerless, might even feel anger towards Mozilla for this - after all, they already downloaded the extension, why would they all just stop working behind their backs? They don't understand what CAs are or why certificates expire. People don't frankly care what place your heart is in when they are angry about something. Perhaps people are being dramatic, but that's normal. People are pretty darn dramatic about Chrome, too.

Meanwhile... I use Firefox everywhere, and I've lost my password manager, adblocking, security-related extensions, etc. all in one go, and the only solutions I'm aware of involve disabling extension signing. Gotta admit, even though I will probably continue using Firefox after this, that it certainly is a bummer.

replies(2): >>19824526 #>>19824547 #
4. sjwright ◴[] No.19824526[source]
> this feels like a big blow to user trust.

And yet every other major browser vendor has punched their users with far worse catastrophes of privacy, security, ripping away features, breaking features, and general shitheaddedness.

Switching browsers because of this incident is like ordering a burger at your favourite restaurant and one time it comes out without the meat patty, so in protest you switch to a crappy alternative restaurant that has had a long history of health code violations.

replies(1): >>19824565 #
5. drewmol ◴[] No.19824547[source]
I know the typical user my have struggles but FWIW, I installed nightly, toggled xpinstall.signatures.required to False installed ublock umatrix and will live with my pw manager's native application for a day or two and it took about 5 minutes.
replies(1): >>19824561 #
6. jchw ◴[] No.19824561{3}[source]
In fairness: I don't really want to disable signature checking. I value these security features and I'm hoping that by tomorrow morning Mozilla has a better solution.
7. jchw ◴[] No.19824565{3}[source]
I'm going to skip the analogies and just say this: If tomorrow this is still broken and I have a choice between installing Chromium, and installing Nightly + disabling security features, It's going to be a tough dilemma for me personally.

I'm glad you have software/vendors you feel you can trust. I definitely don't feel that way about most software anymore. I do think you are being a bit hyperbolic regarding other browser vendors, but to each their own, I don't know what trying to argue about that would solve for anyone.

replies(1): >>19825162 #
8. omnimus ◴[] No.19825099[source]
Honestly then he is just an idiot and he will come back when he realizes he has to login to other services too.
9. omnimus ◴[] No.19825162{4}[source]
Well when you are google employee and you are testing code in firefox... you already have chrome and chromium installed.

I think what is a real tough dillema is being sad about nonfunctioning adblocker while working for the biggest internet ads company.

So are you working in chrome marketing department?

replies(1): >>19825270 #
10. jchw ◴[] No.19825270{5}[source]
>Well when you are google employee and you are testing code in firefox... you already have chrome and chromium installed.

I have computers other than my work computer(s.) I, indeed, do not have Chrome or Chromium installed on my home boxes running NixOS. I do not use my work devices for personal web browsing. I'm currently posting this message with Firefox 66.0.3 on NixOS 19.03.

>I think what is a real tough dillema is being sad about nonfunctioning adblocker while working for the biggest internet ads company. > >So are you working in chrome marketing department?

I'm a software engineer. I'm also over at Github:

https://github.com/jchv

I work at Google because it's an excellent place to work. I'm far from elite; I didn't finish college (couldn't afford) and I grew up in the suburbs of Detroit, so being able to work at any large SV company is something I don't take for granted. I don't think any single employee can claim to love 100% of the things Google does, and that's fine. Nobody is required to.

As for why I would use an adblocker, practically speaking it's both for reducing annoyances and increasing security. Malware (and 0days!) delivered via ads is not unheard of, sadly.