Technology @beehaw.org sabreW4K3 @lazysoci.al 1w ago

Google continues pulling the plug on Manifest v2 • The Register

www.theregister.com Google continues pulling the plug on Manifest v2

Chrome ad blocker stopped working? Time to look elsewhere

Install Firefox!

32 comments

I continue pulling the plug on Google
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
- uBlock Origin is open source and can be freely audited by everyone. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
  
  Does anyone check that updated versions pushed to the extension store, match the available source, and have no extra "features" included?
  
  uBlock (not Origin) was also open source, then it got sold to AdBlock, which also had been sold, to a company that charges advertisers to bypass it.
  
  Yes, but other extensions are not and can access the same permissions. They can even steal the unlock origin source code to do so.
- Is that what manifest v3 does though? Ask the user? I haven't paid a lot of attention but thus far my overall impression has been that they are simply going to forbid a lot of useful things wholesale. Things that ad blockers need to function.
  
  No, neither does. V2 browsers show a generic warning on first install, V3 removes the API. Google argues that it's a security issue... and yes, it is. Their solution though, is some kneejerk BS. Mozilla argues that it's a user's right to privacy to block ads and trackers... and yes, I agree. They don't address the security part, though! So it's an "all or nothing" choice, which is silly.
  
  Ad blockers can still work on V3... not as thoroughly and not as pretty, but more secure. It's a nonsense trade-off, when both issues could be addressed by giving users more control.
  
  It looks like neither Google nor Mozilla want to put in the work or take on the responsibility, while ad blocker developers are simply cheering for the less secure option... which makes me uneasy.
  
  V3 blocks it
- What's wrong with it is perfectly obvious: it doesn't merely ask, it takes the decision away from you.
  
  Edit: and what's more, Firefox using v2 does ask. So like, what??
- Nice FUD you got there.
laughs in Firefox
It's somewhat baffling how one can land at Beehaw while using Chrome. Chrome users should be perfectly happy on Reddit.
Install Firefox

No. I'd rather stop using the internet altogether. There are a lot of ways to block ads and MV2 is only one of them. Disregarding that MV3 adblockers are already a thing.
- While it is still possible to block some ads on chrome the remaining options are inferior. If that is enough for you go ahead.
  
  It's been ages since I have seen an ad on my non-ff browser, desktop or mobile. And it's not Chrome. If you think that the only way to block ads is crappy FF+an extension, then PEBCAK.
- Google shill
  
  Yawn...
  
  Edit: are you shilling for the same Corp. whose revenues depend on Google itself? LOL
- How come you have such strong feelings against Firefox?
  
  Not trying to start a fight, just an honest question. Choosing to rather stop using the internet all together seems extreme for a browser that I use daily, but maybe I'm missing something in your use case.
  
  I strongly dislike Mozilla. They are as shitty as any other Corp., just with less money.
Does this have anything to do with the container manifest API used by docker?
- No, it's about chrome extensions and what permissions they get. Manifest v3 basically disables adblocking extensions

32 comments