Page 2 of 2

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-02, 12:19
by moonbat
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2019-10-02, 12:03
If we hear about it they will be added to the blocklist.. IF they submit them to our Add-ons Site.. They will be EX-TER-MIN-ATED. You know.. The way Mozilla operated for 10 years before they couldn't be bothered.
In general, I doubt anyone making stuff like this would succeed much with our community. When I look at the help questions asked on r/firefox, where they think that uninstalling/reinstalling firefox is the same as making a fresh profile...
Truly it has gone to the lowest common denominator.

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-02, 12:29
by Lootyhoof
Without going into specifics, there HAVE been extensions where, while not copycats, were potential submissions to our site, that were malicious in nature in a few respects. Needless to say those did not end up getting approved. This was of course before the panel was a thing and based on our communication I doubt they will attempt to submit them there. But if they do, they will be banned, that's for certain. ;)

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-02, 12:33
by moonbat
And they didn't get through thanks to you and the others reviewing addon submissions :thumbup:
In other words, what Mozilla decided to ditch in favor of automation.

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-02, 14:46
by Moonraker
A smaller extension library will always be more secure than a larger one like googles.It must be a security nightmare for them having to check and vet thousands of extensions.

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-02, 14:51
by New Tobin Paradigm
Moonraker.. size isn't a factor.. EVERY extension submitted to the Add-ons Sites except by Phoebus Administrators and Add-ons Team Members must be reviewed. A select few are classed as Advanced Developers who get their new submissions enabled but they won't show up in categories or search until they are reviewed. However, direct links and AUS will work. Advanced Developers also get the ability to have unlisted extensions.

So yeah.. three hundred or two thousand it doesn't matter. If they pull shit they will be exterminated. Such is the order of things.

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-29, 22:53
by RJARRRPCGP
"Adblock Flash Player" ->Give me a break! :lol:
(same with "ublock origin Pro" and "player Downloader")

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-29, 23:48
by Kathuluforz
Off-topic:
Oopsie! https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/s ... ing-sites/
*Davros hears all

Re: Do/did these bugs apply to PM, and is XUL as bad as claimed?

Posted: 2019-10-30, 01:42
by New Tobin Paradigm
So not speak ill of our creator. I OBEY ONLY DAVROS.