Re: FYI: Mandatory extension signing in Firefox

Path	csiph.com!news.swapon.de!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news-2.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.enyo.de!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Re: FYI: Mandatory extension signing in Firefox
Date	Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:45:45 +0100
Lines	24
Message-ID	<87wppdl8eu.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> (permalink)
References	<nblasr$5ic$1@news.albasani.net>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain
X-Trace	news.enyo.de 1457423145 28103 192.168.18.20 (8 Mar 2016 07:45:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	news@enyo.de
Cancel-Lock	sha1:+K1o6vjecxsYSiFPO//hbbzD0yM=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:29855

Show key headers only | View raw

* Stefan Weiss:

> Users can still use one of the alternative versions mentioned above, but
> that's not always feasible:
>
> - You can't just ask all of your beta testers to run an off-brand or
>   experimental release.
>
> - Experimental builds may be buggy and insecure.
>
> - If you're writing an extension, but can only install it in
>   non-standard FF versions, you cannot test it where it will actually
>   be used.
>
> - Non-standard versions often have no convenient upgrade methods.

I think the Adobe DRM only runs in the original Firefox, so if you
install an alternative version, you won't be able to get access to
some online content.

I don't know to what extent add-ons an circumvent DRM.  Perhaps
Mozilla is worried that without mandatory add-on signing, Firefox will
lose users because users can't access restricted online content
anymore?

Thread

FYI: Mandatory extension signing in Firefox Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 02:46 +0100
  Re: FYI: Mandatory extension signing in Firefox Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> - 2016-03-08 08:45 +0100
  Re: FYI: Mandatory extension signing in Firefox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-12 16:51 +0100

csiph-web