News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for extensions. Parent comment

Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by pcwalton on Sunday July 03, 2016 @01:16PM (#12026771)
> When I asked if he knows about any such case happening, the answer was no. Then what is the purpose of bothering the user about an attack vector if the attack is merely theoretical?

I'm not OK with the philosophy of "let's not fix any security holes until we find someone actively exploiting them".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by greendestiny_re on Sunday July 03, 2016 @02:31PM (#12027082)
You are using quotation marks as if though I said those words.

quote (kwəut) verb 1. to repeat the exact words of a person as they were said or written.

My point was about not giving the user enough information to make an informed decision yet demanding a decision anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by cbreeden on Sunday July 03, 2016 @03:19PM (#12027250)
It's still not clear to me. Are you suggesting that uses not be notified of a potential yet not verified security hole or not?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by greendestiny_re on Sunday July 03, 2016 @06:01PM (#12027835)
In short, I would like to see Firefox empower and inform its users.

The current implementation of the Adobe Flash plugin warning does neither, and by the looks of it, add-on permissions mentioned in the OP will be the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by ben0x539 on Sunday July 03, 2016 @04:20PM (#12027458)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinctio... suggests that quotation marks are valid here (which is clearly the most important aspect of this dispute)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mozilla shouldn't copy Chrome's permission prompt for ext... by greendestiny_re on Sunday July 03, 2016 @06:59PM (#12028016)
I'd cede the point if the topic was abstract philosophy or my comment was intentionally vague, but neither of those are true.

What I said and what pcwalton argued against have nothing in common, except two out of 13 words: "any" and "them", which means pcwalton simply made up 84.62% of that statement. Why? It makes for a handy strawman so he can appear intellectually superior.

[ Parent | on HN ]