Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.internet.services.google > #885

Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently

From Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.security.misc, comp.internet.services.google, comp.misc, alt.privacy
Subject Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently
Date 2019-01-28 07:56 +0100
Message-ID <q2mcjc.v4.1@nieveler.org> (permalink)
References <q2gp9t$j8o$2@neodome.net> <q2i74b.590.1@nieveler.org> <q2ipm9$ol0$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 27.01.2019 00:15, Rich wrote:
> In comp.misc Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 26.01.2019 05:56, !!Credit wrote:
>>> Google engineers have proposed changes to the open-source Chromium
>>> browser that will break content-blocking extensions, including ad
>>> blockers.
>>
>> It will also break data-stealing malware extensions though - which is
>> the point of the change
> 
> The solution there, however, is not to remove the API, but to add a
> "grant only" permissions system such that the end user has to grant an
> extension the right to use the API.

Indeed, that would be the far better choice

> Those installing uMatrix or uBlockOrigin will naturally want to "allow"
> both to access the API.  But if some other extension, that does not
> need such access, asks to be granted, then the user has the choice of
> denying such access.

I wouldn't leave the decision with the users... I'd allow it depending 
on the category the extension was put in in the app store. That way, all 
extensions that want to use such elevated priviledges would be far more 
obvious, AND could be subject to more scrutiny without overloading the 
review system.

Leaving the decision just with the enduser means just another exercise 
in social engineering - you already got the user to want to install your 
extension anyway (manual extension installs were already disabled a 
while ago, weren't they?), so you just need a convincing argument to 
explain to the user why you want those permissions that Google is 
warning you could do bad things.

Back to comp.internet.services.google | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently "!!Credit" <payroll@qi3.com> - 2019-01-26 04:56 +0000
  Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-01-26 10:54 +0000
    Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently outlook shitemail <microsuck@msn.com> - 2019-01-26 13:14 +0000
    Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 00:25 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2019-02-01 00:37 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-01 00:58 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2019-02-01 14:10 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-01 00:54 +0000
        Pi-hole (Was: Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently) snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-02-01 07:59 +0100
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org> - 2019-02-01 09:00 -0600
    Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently tom <tom@0.0.0.0> - 2019-02-17 11:42 -0800
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-17 20:24 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Pabst Blue Ribbon <pabst@blue.ribbon> - 2019-02-18 11:27 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-18 11:35 +0000
          Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-02-18 21:57 +0000
            Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-18 22:33 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-02-18 21:46 +0000
  Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 17:58 +0100
    Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-01-26 23:15 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2019-01-26 23:22 +0000
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-01-27 11:09 +0000
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 08:01 +0100
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 07:56 +0100
        Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-01-28 11:26 +0000
          Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 15:11 +0100
    Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2019-01-27 19:58 +0100
      Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 08:03 +0100

csiph-web