Why don't you let us continue with our add-ons at our risk?
I upgraded to Firefox 4.3. All of sudden 4 of my plug-in are disabled and I have no way to re-enable them because some G*% D*&* Developer has decided they are a "Security Risk." I switched to Fire Fox as my default browser long ago because it was basically superior in performance and flexibility to Internet Explorer. Now it is becoming MORE DICTATORIAL and LESS FLEXIBLE than Google Chrome and, as you already know, the "defunct" Internet Explorer. IS IT BECAUSE YOU THINK YOU KNOW BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE WHAT THE BROWSER COMMUNITY WANTS AND NEEDS? I NOW HAVE TO BACK VERSION MY FIRE FOX TO HAVE MY PLUG-INS BACK. GET A CLUE AND PROPERLY DO USABILITY AND ACCEPTANCE TEST INSTEAD OF MAKING OUR LIVES A NIGHTMARE! Brian Clark
Todas as respostas (5)
Hi,
Required add-on signing for extensions is new in Firefox version 43. Back in February, it was announced that, for a safer add-on experience, all extensions will have to be verified and signed by Mozilla before they can be installed.
Unsigned extensions that are already installed will be automatically disabled. For more information, see Add-on signing in Firefox.
Extensions hosted on addons.mozilla.org are automatically signed. If an extension you wish to use is distributed by a third-party, it must be signed. Please ask the add-on developer or vendor if an updated and signed version of the add-on is available. This signing requirement is mandatory in regular release and beta versions of Firefox. For testing purposes, it will still be possible to configure Firefox Developer Edition and Nightly versions to run unsigned extensions. For details, please see https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing.
More dictatorial mandates by an "Organization" that wants everyone to play in THEIR sandbox... Which is the main problem with most vendors. You are trying to force vendors to come to you, regardless of what the users are doing.
Firefox was once the users' user-friendly browser. Now it's a techno-dictature created by and for an elite of developers.
The rule for add-ons to be signed denies reliable add-ons for handicapped. And also for all other users. You close down big, well-known add-ons only because THEY have forgotten to sign, and on one message you ask us users to write to them remind them to update their signature. I think that is a job for developers – you probably have some software so you can contacts them all at the same time.
Furthermore, you cannot explain or prove why signed add-ons should make it safer for the users. If I creator of add-ons wants to make problems for the Firefox users, there are thousands of other ways to do this also with a signed software.
Then you offer users who know nothing about developing browsers a complicated possibility to disable your requirement by toggling a preference. That's difficult, takes time, and also risky for unexperienced users.
Why not add a yes-button for users who want to take the risk to use unsigned but well-known and reliable add-ons? It's up to us, not to you!
I bought a new computer in March, and until I found your info I couldn't understand why Firefox acted so strange. I thought it was my new anti-virus program which caused the mess, and closed down function after function to make Firefox and my very important add-ons to start functioning as on the old computer. But since Google Chrome worked I had to change to that and try to find similar add-ons. It was many weeks of work; I'm unexperienced with all other browsers than Firefox.
And when Firefox is slow because you have made the code unnecessary long because of new features in a too flashy Firefox, you give users "the option" to turn back to a basic version, which is Firefox with all personal changes taken away and saved in a "my profile map". That's so wrong.
I would prefer to use a very much simpler Firefox version on my computers, even black and white instead of colors, if I only can keep my bookmarks, add-ons, text expanders and other personal choices. I want you to make a safe version of Firefox 3 for 32- and 64-computers"
Steffen Beck, Sweden
Hi,
The people who answer questions here, for the most part, are other Firefox users volunteering their time (like me), not Mozilla employees or Firefox developers.
If you want to leave feedback for Firefox developers, you can go to the Firefox Help menu and select Submit Feedback... or use this link. Your feedback gets collected at http://input.mozilla.org/, where a team of people read it and gather data about the most common issues.
- Toggling a preference was a temporary "fix" that was around from Firefox 39 thru 42. That pref is gone now.
- That was never a serious consideration, as the developers thought doing that would provide a preference that Malware could "tinker with" and preclude the effectiveness of "signing" altogether.
- Then build it yourself or with a group of friends using the Firefox source code. Or use one of the many 3rd party versions or other Gecko-based browsers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers#Gecko-based