InformAction Forums

That makes it really tricky to know if by using an add-on you're running closed source code, doesn't it? You can't even tell by looking at the add-on's license! How can a layman tell if an add-on makes use of closed source code? Is it enough to just look at the file extensions inside the XPI? If th...

Agreed, when I read it I thought the same thing, but wasn't sure if maybe I misunderstood, thank you for handling it.

Thanks GµårÐïåñ for the feedback, but I'm not clear whether you're saying this can't be reliably killed by user.js? More than likely as Giorgio said, it will be controllable by a option/setting and certainly can be as such neutered using a `user.js` file but the fact is that the subset of the popul...

This kind of thing has always backfired, they would be better off partnering with and supporting open initiatives like OpenDNS instead. While COMODO still does their "secure dns", it backfired for them long ago and they stopped making it default, but now just give options for it in their s...

WebExtensions do not expose their settings in the about:config anymore, they are placed inside IndexDB structure, and as such you won't see them in the browser. Using a db viewer is an option but not always reliable, and could actually end up corrupting the extension's data or even cause the browser...

Do you have an adblocker? Most of them have filters that will break that, NoScript can only detect what is present.

The references to aolcdn.com are due to sites that are "owned" by them and will always pull from them, no account is needed with them and doesn't mean you are using their services. I am still not sure what the problem is to be honest.

Can't be sure but likely it is coming from an ad on a page you are viewing that is triggering the connect. Also, if you have prefetch enabled, it will often start pulling links on the page in the background even if you are not visiting or planning to visit it, you can disable that. Without more on h...

You say an add-on may rely on proprietary code or libraries, but where could they be located in the Mozilla ecosystem? XPI files are open source, as is Firefox. Must any proprietary code then be openly released in an XPI file and only licensed under a proprietary license in order for it to be able ...

... I was just hoping to find some answers, because I haven't found any resources that would explain this in a way that non-developers would understand. ... If anyone understands this better or knows of any resources that would shed some more light on it I'd be grateful to know. Thank you :D My ent...

Might be best for you to understand what you are talking about first. It is not the addon that is necessarily proprietary but rather parts of their codes, or libraries they rely on that might be and it is perfectly valid. The open source of the addon is the part that does the job, if it calls a piec...

Just be careful, browser gets blamed for a lot that has nothing to do with anything. Technically any API limitation is a "browser bug", so it becomes a bit of an overreaching net and ultimately meaningless.

Their API is not mature yet, they have A LOT of lacking API in the rush to get it out there, so it will be quite a while before they become reasonably usable for everything. This was the same issue Chrome faced in the early days and now they have it better covered and Mozilla decided, oh yeah we are...

Giorgio, I know you are busy with NoScript and have prioritized it, and that's understandable. However, FlashGot has been unattended for a while, there are request that I have made before which would be nice but cant wait, it still has not been WebExt ported yet which means 57+ will not be able to u...

From the conclusions: Right now, the most secure browsers are Chrome and Opera. Yes, but they used the whole length of the article hedging their bets and trying to offset their "conclusion" as basically translated to "DEPENDS". Otherwise, you BEGIN with saying, the most secure b...