Cybersecurity

5408 readers

99 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
No Ads / Spamming.
No pornography.

Community Rules

Idk, keep it semi-professional?
Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Notable mention to [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Disabling automatic browser extension updates as a security measure? (vlemmy.net)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It seems every now and again some popular Chrome or Firefox extension decides to "go evil" seemingly out of nowhere.

Stylish got caught logging browser history, The Great Suspender turned out to be spyware, and, in the case of "get cookies.txt", which was endorsed by youtube-dl, apparently the user is not the only one "getting" the cookies.

In most of these cases, it seems that trustworthy extensions get sold off to some shady third parties, or the developers just "turns evil". This got me wondering: would it be an effective security precaution to simply disable updates for browser extensions? i.e. to download the extension manually from the developer, instead of relying on chrome web store / firefox addon catalogue. It wouldn't help much if the extension you're using contains malware now, but it would prevent malware being installed in potential future updates.

So, what do you guys think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It looks like the problem here is you can "sell" the published version along with the code, and the new developer gets access to your already installed userbase.

That uh, probably shouldn't happen. I'll even go so far as to say that's completely insane and there should be NO WAY a purchaser of anything should get access to publish a new version of something under the same name and have it push out updates without manual user intervention.

For example, Apple/iOS does it sanely where if a new person is going to publish even the exact same app, they consider it a completely separate and new piece of software and it won't auto-update the previous incarnation of itself, and it's checked for suspicious nonsense as if it was brand new and never seen before.