AdvertisementĮventually, Ares2 added rules that fundamentally broke the NoScript website. Maone found new ways to work around the filters, but Ares2 consistently retaliated by adding increasingly draconian rules to the filter list. Palant responded by instructing the AdBlock Plus filter list maintainer-an individual known as Ares2-to add a filter that would specifically block ads on Maone's domain. In order to prevent AdBlock Plus from undermining the financial sustainability of his project, Maone modified the NoScript website and circumvented the block. Maone funds the development of NoScript by placing advertisements on the extension's official website and by receiving donations from end-users.
NoScript developer Giorgio Maone recently had a controversial altercation with Wladimir Palant, the developer behind AdBlock Plus, an extension that uses a blacklist to selectively prevent websites from displaying advertisements. NoScript's behavior is regarded by some experts as a major security improvement because it reduces the browser's exposure to untrusted JavaScript. NoScript is a widely-used extension that is designed to block browser scripting and plugins. A more pernicious problem emerges when extensions break each other intentionally as a result of conflicting interests and ideologies. This is a well-known problem that has been explored elsewhere in detail. Extensions still regularly break each other by accident and mess up the browser in all kinds of unintended ways. Mozilla goes to great lengths to mitigate the symptoms of this problem by establishing all kinds of protective barriers that help users avoid unwanted and unsafe extensions, but little can be done to address the problem itself. Although it allows developers to create extremely useful extensions that can deeply integrate with virtually any aspect of Firefox, it simultaneously opens the door for troubling security problems and compatibility issues. This approach to extensibility is a double-edged sword. They are broadly permitted to manipulate the browser's behavior and user interface at will and can easily tamper with the functionality of other extensions. Extensions are not isolated or sandboxed. The situation has compelled Mozilla to propose a policy change aimed at curbing bad behavior in add-ons.įirefox's extension system is really just an officially supported mechanism for monkey-patching the browser. The darker side of Firefox add-ons was exposed last week when a conflict between the developers of the two popular extensions got out of hand. Although this extensibility delivers a lot of value to Firefox users, it also creates some thorny problems. One of the greatest strengths of the Firefox Web browser is its powerful extension system, which gives third-party developers the ability to expand the browser's capabilities.
0 kommentar(er)
