←back to thread

Et Tu, Grammarly?

(dbushell.com)
279 points dbushell | 6 comments | 29 Mar 25 10:27 UTC | HN request time: 0.406s | source | bottom
Show context
dbushell ◴[29 Mar 25 10:27 UTC] No.43514309[source]▶
How do you deal with hostile browser extensions?
replies(5): >>43514670 #>>43515016 #>>43515058 #>>43516270 #>>43516486 #
1. amelius ◴[29 Mar 25 15:25 UTC] No.43516270[source]▶
At this point, I'm not installing any browser extensions, period.
replies(5): >>43516317 #>>43516454 #>>43516480 #>>43516755 #>>43518863 #
2. gs17 ◴[29 Mar 25 15:32 UTC] No.43516317[source]▶
OP's problem wasn't that they had it installed, it's that enough of their users did to make it a problem when it breaks the site's CSS.
3. bmacho ◴[29 Mar 25 15:53 UTC] No.43516454[source]▶
Browser extensions are the equivalent of running random .exe on your computer except that you have to trust every vendor protecting their keys forever due to the autoupdate.
4. bufferoverflow ◴[29 Mar 25 15:57 UTC] No.43516480[source]▶
But our users do.
5. silvestrov ◴[29 Mar 25 16:41 UTC] No.43516755[source]▶
The biggest problem with browser extensions is that the source code (both css and javascript) is not easy to read/check.

There should be an easy "view source" for extensions inside Chrome and extensions should be mandated to ship non-minimized code.

6. kelvinjps10 ◴[29 Mar 25 21:25 UTC] No.43518863[source]▶
Not even ublock?