←back to thread

"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

(developer.chrome.com)
552 points freedomben | 5 comments | 11 Oct 24 14:20 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
emaro ◴[11 Oct 24 14:38 UTC] No.41809865[source]▶
For people that have somehow missed the story, manifest v3 removed support for certain powerful network apis, severly limiting ad-blockers capabilities. uBlock Origin will not work anymore without manifest v2 (there's a v3 compatible lite version of uBlock Origin).
replies(2): >>41810024 #>>41810092 #
btown ◴[11 Oct 24 15:01 UTC] No.41810092[source]▶
It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issueco... discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 - and while there's no plan yet to discontinue the Chrome MV3 compatible version, there are a million ways that this could go wrong.

My only long-term hope for this space is that a nonzero segment of congressional representatives have had ad blockers installed by their aides, realize that their experience online takes a nosedive when MV2 is discontinued, and calls for hearings! Blocking isn't just about not seeing ads, it's about a user's freedom to set up their "user agent" to preserve their privacy online from sites that don't respect their wishes. That's a right that Google is using its market power to erode, and it's not something we should take sitting down.

More on MV3 from a few years ago: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-ma...

replies(6): >>41812158 #>>41814592 #>>41815400 #>>41815495 #>>41816001 #>>41816859 #
Kbelicius ◴[11 Oct 24 18:42 UTC] No.41812158[source]▶
> It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile:

Why would you even use the lite version on firefox when the original works?

replies(4): >>41812478 #>>41812645 #>>41812697 #>>41813945 #
jeffbee ◴[11 Oct 24 21:30 UTC] No.41813945[source]▶
The "original" UBO is basically the mother of all supply chain vulnerabilities and whenever the inevitable exploit happens, everyone who thought they were a connoisseur of privacy is going to get completely pwned. UBO Lite works without being a gigantic security vuln.
replies(2): >>41814345 #>>41846291 #
1. Rebelgecko ◴[11 Oct 24 22:11 UTC] No.41814345{3}[source]▶
Some people may think what you're saying is outlandish, but it's worth remembering that this is pretty much what already happened to Ublock (which led to the forking of Ublock Origin and return of gorehill)
replies(1): >>41814739 #
2. 0cf8612b2e1e ◴[11 Oct 24 23:02 UTC] No.41814739[source]▶
Not saying it cannot happen, but in Firefox, it is a “Recommended“ extension which gets reviewed per release. A sophisticated attack could slip through, but a ham fisted takeover is unlikely.
replies(1): >>41815358 #
3. Jach ◴[12 Oct 24 00:37 UTC] No.41815358[source]▶
It's also worth mentioning that Firefox doesn't force you to auto-update add-ons, but Chrome/Chromium do. (There was a hack workaround to keep Chromium from updating, but I forgot what it was or if it still works. It wasn't a trivial option in the browser itself like it should be.)
replies(1): >>41817130 #
4. isomorphic- ◴[12 Oct 24 07:27 UTC] No.41817130{3}[source]▶
I use a certain extension. An update turned the extension into payware, locking 90% of the features behind a paywall. So I refuse to update it and instead continue to use the revision that still has all the original features. I would be absolutely incensed and outraged if my browser insisted on forcing me to update this extension!

Surely there are better ways for a developer to make money off of an existing extension without suddenly locking previously available functions behind a paywall. Perhaps instead paywall NEW features? Or ask for donations?

replies(1): >>41833056 #
5. ThunderSizzle ◴[14 Oct 24 00:38 UTC] No.41833056{4}[source]▶
New features requires work. Donations require charity, which doesn't exist in the mind of someone who does that