From 2b82f3d044fa5d06f5ce6cf023493153468064ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ColoursofOSINT <130006229+ColoursofOSINT@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 03:27:23 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update 2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md --- _posts/2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md | 15 +++++++++------ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/_posts/2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md b/_posts/2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md index 80e0ba1d36a..bd64ccb6b0b 100644 --- a/_posts/2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md +++ b/_posts/2023-09-10-Firefox-Part-3.md @@ -10,9 +10,11 @@ math: true # Thoughts on Recommended Extensions My findings about the Recommended Extensions in Firefox is that the program is good in theory, but has serious flaws in execution and policy. The program appears to have lax examination procedures and ineffective policies which provide a false sense of security for Firefox users. -## Policy Problems: No requirement to allow examination of code +## Policy Problems: + +### No requirement to allow examination of code -- Extensions can use a custom licence or end user agreement which has consumer limiting terms that prevent the examination of source code. It's very hard to find malicious code if the user is prevented from searching for such code. Furthermore, for Firefox to claim that recommended extensions have the “highest standards of security” is dubious, since exposing or even investigating malicious code can come with risks of financial and legal repercussions. +Extensions can use a custom licence or end user agreement which has consumer limiting terms that prevent the examination of source code. It's very hard to find malicious code if the user is prevented from searching for such code. Furthermore, for Firefox to claim that recommended extensions have the “highest standards of security” is dubious, since exposing or even investigating malicious code can come with risks of financial and legal repercussions. For example, Enhancer for YouTube has a licence that states "nobody has the right to review the Source Code" and that "nobody has the right to reverse-engineer" while promising legal action should the terms be violated. If malicious code was found in an investigation, I wouldn't feel comfortable reporting it for fear of legal issues. @@ -29,13 +31,14 @@ The developers asseration that if there was "do not collect data of any sort, an Recommended extensions should be held to the highest standards. Users should be allowed to search for malware, adware and spyware without worrying about legal consequences. -- Overly Permissive Permissions +### Overly Permissive Permissions ## Extension Examination Failures -- Search for common terms -- Permission scope analysis -- +### Search for common terms +### Permission scope analysis + + ## Communication Failures # Afterword