On 3/6/2015 5:19 PM, WaltS48 wrote: > On 03/06/2015 07:47 PM, David E. Ross wrote: >> On 3/6/2015 10:42 AM, Rick Merrill wrote: >>> Desiree wrote on 02/13/2015 1:59 AM: >>>> On 2/12/2015 9:05 AM, David E. Ross wrote: >>>>> According to >>>>> <https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/02/10/extension-signing-safer-experience/>, >>>>> Firefox will no longer allow extensions to be installed unless signed by >>>>> Mozilla. Users will have NO option to allow an unsigned extension to be >>>>> installed. That is, signatures by Mozilla will be mandatory. >>>>> >>>>> Will this also be implemented in SeaMonkey? >>>>> >>>> The blog states this will NOT be implemented for SeaMonkey. >>>> >>>> I stunned that Mozilla is doing this. This is political and could be the >>>> death of Fx. >>> I can understand that some users love extensions, but I think security is >>> the reason >>> that this is being done, and so I am much in favor of it. >>> >> >> Before I retired, I had a 41-year career in software, first programming >> and then testing. I developed approximately 25% of the specifications >> for a military software project that eventually cost about $400,000,000. >> I was called out of the shower (at home, getting ready for bed) to take >> a phone call from a satellite launch facility to explain how to use the >> command and control software for a space satellite that was within a >> hour of launch. I taught end-users about the mathematics underlying >> their software. I p[roved that a new software package failed to >> implement the customer's requirements, delaying deployment about 6 >> months while the package was rewritten. >> >> I do not need or want some developer who was not yet born when I started >> my career imposing unwanted protection on me. >> > > > How is a developer imposing unwanted protection, when they are > automatically scanning something an extension developer created, that > may contain malicious code that will harm your system, then signing it > if it passes review that it does not contain any malicious code and > allowing it to be installed in your Firefox? >
I have extensions that do exactly what I want. They were NOT obtained from addons.mozilla.org (AMO), primarily because their developers do not want to deal with AMO's bureaucracy. The blocking of unsigned extensions will block me from obtaining future new extensions and extension updates, without any option to override the blocking. This is why the "protection" is unwanted. -- David E. Ross I am sticking with SeaMonkey 2.26.1 until saved passwords can be used when autocomplete=off. See <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=433238>. _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
