News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions. Parent comment

Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by cpeterso on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @04:14AM (#10039659)
> If I want to be able to continue this process, I will need to sign the extension myself

This seems like a good approach to me. Instead of Mozilla itself signing developers' extensions, why can't Mozilla issue certificates so developers can sign their own extensions locally? If a developer turns rogue, Mozilla can revoke their certificate.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by gerv on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @07:39AM (#10040272)
Because bad guys can just keep getting new certs when their old ones are revoked, unless you do identity validation (which costs money as it requires actual humans, so the certs can't be cheap or free).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by schrodinger on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @09:06AM (#10040680)
Reviewing plugins costs somewhere around the same amount of human time/money, no?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by malka on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @09:18AM (#10040769)
If their review are as thorough as Android app's one, they cost about nothing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by reubenmorais on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @10:15AM (#10041191)
Add-on reviews are done largely by volunteers.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by soapdog on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @10:29AM (#10041288)
the addons signage is an automated process.
[ Parent | on HN ]