this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
107 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
38112 readers
642 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It keeps amazing me how these Manifest V2 vs. V3 discussions, fail to address the elephant in the room: intercept and modify network requests.
Do you want your web browser — that you may be using to access your banking account, or your shopping account, or an internet, or any sort of private content you want to keep secure — to allow every extension you install, forever and ever, to "intercept and modify network requests"... even if it initially didn't, but then over time the developer, or whoever the developer might sell it to (see AdBlock and uBlock), might decide to "intercept and modify network requests", for any reason they want, without any warning?
What is so wrong with the browser ASKING THE USER before denying/granting that permission to random extensions?
And how about having the browser let the user decide whether an extension is allowed to do that, on a per-website basis? I know, you can tell uBlock Origin to ignore a website... and "trust me, bro"? How about the browser enforced that instead?
Firefox does ask the user for this permission