Mozilla recently removed every version of uBlock Origin Lite from their add-on store except for the oldest version.

Mozilla says a manual review flagged these issues:

Consent, specifically Nonexistent: For add-ons that collect or transmit user data, the user must be informed…

Your add-on contains minified, concatenated or otherwise machine-generated code. You need to provide the original sources…

uBlock Origin’s developer gorhill refutes this with linked evidence.

Contrary to what these emails suggest, the source code files highlighted in the email:

  • Have nothing to do with data collection, there is no such thing anywhere in uBOL
  • There is no minified code in uBOL, and certainly none in the supposed faulty files

Even for people who did not prefer this add-on, the removal could have a chilling effect on uBlock Origin itself.

Incidentally, all the files reported as having issues are exactly the same files being used in uBO for years, and have been used in uBOL as well for over a year with no modification. Given this, it’s worrisome what could happen to uBO in the future.

And gorhill notes uBO Lite had a purpose on Firefox, especially on mobile devices:

[T]here were people who preferred the Lite approach of uBOL, which was designed from the ground up to be an efficient suspendable extension, thus a good match for Firefox for Android.

New releases of uBO Lite do not have a Firefox extension; the last version of this coincides with gorhill’s message. The Firefox addon page for uBO Lite is also gone.

  • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m convinced that 80% of all these threads and the responses within them are astroturfing by Google to cause everyone to despair that Mozilla is no better than Google and that there will never be anything that could be developed to compete with Google if Mozilla went under.

    There’s just too goddamn many of them and they’re all filled with the same negative comments. It’s just like the “no way bro, I love paying for YouTube why you gotta have everything for free bro?” bullshit from a few months ago.

  • aleats@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Sometimes you really have to stop and ask yourself what the fuck is going on at Mozilla’s HQ. It’s insane how they manage to shoot themselves in the foot at least once a week.

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yep. What is the likelihood of coincidence when 1) Google’s just released manifest V3 2) is cracking down hard on ad blocking 3) is failing hard at being more than a nuisance to ad block users and 4) Mozilla is attacking its most widely used 3rd party feature; the core feature of Google’s scorn.

        This is why I don’t donate money to Firefox. Mozilla, the for-profit corporation, should not exist. It’s a parasitic entity that has no value, need, or right to exist. Users should be able to donate to Firefox and vote on specific features, without Mozilla swinging its dick around and ass blasting us all. If donations were transparent and accountable, I’d donate hundreds of dollars a year, for the rest of my life. Because of Mozillas continuous ratfuckery, they get nothing from me. I wonder how true that is for the majority of its user base.

  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Reviving a long-dead thread for a relevant update, in a top-level post because you deleted all of your replies in the thread where it was relevant.

    Mozilla did reply to my email asking for clarification on their Fakespot privacy policy, and whether they collect or sell user data, as we were discussing - though that reply took them four weeks. Their response in full:

    “”" Hello,

    Thank you for contacting Mozilla and for your question. At this time, Fakespot does not sell or share any user data pursuant to any applicable privacy laws. The only data we share outside of Mozilla are generalized aggregated metrics with service providers who make Faksepot run to help us with logging and debugging issues to provide an uninterrupted experience for our customers, and we do not share this data for monetary gain. We are in the process of updating our privacy policy for additional clarity on all the points referenced in your email.

    We trust this answers your questions and thank you again for reaching out.

    Kind regards, Mozilla “”"

    • LWD@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      What an email to read. I find it particularly valuable for the things it does not say, but not at all encouraging.

      We are in the process of updating our privacy policy for additional clarity on all the points referenced in your email.

      They don’t say the TOS is incorrect or too broad. And they don’t say they will remove their promise to sell private data to advertisers.

      At this time, Fakespot does not sell or share any user data pursuant to any applicable privacy laws.

      At this time? Pursuant to the law? If Mozilla is abiding by law and nothing more, that explains why they are legally forced to admit they sell private data to advertisers.

      And the law is the lowest bar imaginable. Google operates under the law. Is Mozilla not better than them?

      … service providers who make Faksepot run…

      …and they can’t spell their own name right.

      • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        God, you’re exhausting. They don’t sell the data. Get over it. The email left no room for ambiguity. You’re reaching so far it’s embarrassing. Are you really that jaded?

        • LWD@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hey, it’s been a few weeks. Guess whether Mozilla has updated their privacy policy yet!

          It’s very clear what they say on their corporate website, right?

        • LWD@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          You posted a privately sent email that contradicts a publicly accessible privacy policy. In the four weeks it took them to send that to you, nothing has been changed, same as the prior year. And they couldn’t even bother to spell their own product name right.

          Do you acknowledge that the privacy policy makes it extremely clear that they do sell private data, as outlined in the table that they made for people who struggle to read and mentally parse full paragraphs of text?