Many extensions don't work on support.mozilla.org
Hi 🙂 This is a follow-up to https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1511440.
The problem is this: support.mozilla.org is a site intended for asking support questions, and it is very inconvenient not to be able to use extensions that assist with typing (notably Unicodify and Clippings).
i have 2 suggestions to do:
1) Let the user choose whether to keep extensions enabled (in which case support.mozilla.org is not privileged, the user cannot send "Troubleshooting Information", and there is no security vulnerability), or to send "Troubleshooting Information" (in which case extensions are disabled).
2) Review the design of support.mozilla.org in a way that a subdomain like ffinfos.support.mozilla.org is privileged instead of support.mozilla.org, Firefox sends "Troubleshooting Information" to ffinfos.support.mozilla.org, and extensions are enabled on support.mozilla.org but can never interact with data that Firefox would send to ffinfos.support.mozilla.org.
What do you think about this?
Alle Antworten (4)
James said
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/quarantined-domains
Unicodify (https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/unicodify-text-transformer/) has a section "Run on sites with restrictions" which is set to "Allow".
it doesn't work.
what's wrong?
Clippings (https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/clippings/) has no section "Run on sites with restrictions". is it right?
The important detail is that this is controlled per add-on, not only per site. If an add-on shows “Run on sites with restrictions” and it is set to Allow, then Firefox is letting it try to run there. But the add-on still has to request the right host/content-script permissions and support that mode itself.
So yes, it is possible that Unicodify shows that option while Clippings does not. For Clippings I would treat that as an add-on limitation/design choice, unless its developer adds support for restricted domains. For support.mozilla.org specifically, the safer workaround is probably an OS-level text replacement/clipboard tool, because that works outside Firefox’s extension permission model.
Geändert am von sagenuage81
sagenuage81 said
The important detail is that this is controlled per add-on, not only per site. If an add-on shows “Run on sites with restrictions” and it is set to Allow, then Firefox is letting it try to run there. But the add-on still has to request the right host/content-script permissions and support that mode itself. So yes, it is possible that Unicodify shows that option while Clippings does not. For Clippings I would treat that as an add-on limitation/design choice, unless its developer adds support for restricted domains.
If I'm not mistaken, the add-on has to be designed to display "Run on sites with restrictions", otherwise it won't display? Is it equivalent if it does not display or if it is set to "Don't Allow"?
What exactly does this setting allow? I mean: on the one hand, some add-ons don’t need to be allowed to work; on the other hand, an allowed add-on can’t do everything.
For support.mozilla.org specifically, the safer workaround is probably an OS-level text replacement/clipboard tool, because that works outside Firefox’s extension permission model.
I would really like these features to be available at OS-level. Unfortunately, they are available on Mac but not on Linux. In the meantime, I would at least like there to be no limitations within Firefox. :-)
What do you think of the two suggestions I made in my initial post?
Sie müssen sich mit Ihrem Benutzerkonto anmelden, um auf Beiträge zu antworten. Bitte stellen Sie eine neue Frage, wenn Sie noch kein Benutzerkonto haben.