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

General project discussion
Forum rules
This General Discussion board is meant for topics that are still relevant to Pale Moon, web browsers, browser tech, and related, but don't have a more fitting board available.

Please stick to the relevance of this forum here, which focuses on everything around the Pale Moon project and its user community. "Random" subjects don't belong here, and should be posted in the Off-Topic board.
User avatar
moonbat
Moon Magic practitioner
Moon Magic practitioner
Posts: 2165
Joined: 2015-12-09, 15:45

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

Post by moonbat » 2019-10-02, 12:19

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.
"One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them and in the darkness BIND them."

Linux Mint 20 Xfce x64 on HP i5 laptop with 12 GB RAM, always latest versions of PM & Basilisk unless specified.

User avatar
Lootyhoof
Themeist
Themeist
Posts: 1454
Joined: 2012-02-09, 23:35
Location: United Kingdom

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

Post by Lootyhoof » 2019-10-02, 12:29

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. ;)

User avatar
moonbat
Moon Magic practitioner
Moon Magic practitioner
Posts: 2165
Joined: 2015-12-09, 15:45

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

Post by moonbat » 2019-10-02, 12:33

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.
"One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them and in the darkness BIND them."

Linux Mint 20 Xfce x64 on HP i5 laptop with 12 GB RAM, always latest versions of PM & Basilisk unless specified.

User avatar
Moonraker
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1497
Joined: 2015-09-30, 23:02
Location: uk.

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

Post by Moonraker » 2019-10-02, 14:46

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.
Xenial puppy linux 32-bit.

Pale moon 28.9.3

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 7843
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Space, maybe..

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

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2019-10-02, 14:51

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.
Image
- Mars will never be free until the sands run red with Earther blood! -

Image

RJARRRPCGP
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 378
Joined: 2015-06-22, 19:48
Location: USA (North Springfield, Vermont)
Contact:

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

Post by RJARRRPCGP » 2019-10-29, 22:53

"Adblock Flash Player" ->Give me a break! :lol:
(same with "ublock origin Pro" and "player Downloader")

User avatar
Kathuluforz
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 300
Joined: 2019-06-13, 13:42
Location: Montana

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

Post by Kathuluforz » 2019-10-29, 23:48

*Davros hears all
Pale Moon 28.13.0 (64) Win7 pro (64)

"People will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think." ~ Aldous Huxley
'DON'T PANIC'

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 7843
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Space, maybe..

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

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2019-10-30, 01:42

So not speak ill of our creator. I OBEY ONLY DAVROS.
Image
- Mars will never be free until the sands run red with Earther blood! -

Image

Locked