Mozilla recently removed every version of uBlock Origin Lite from their add-on store except for the oldest version.

Mozilla says a manual review flagged these issues:

Consent, specifically Nonexistent: For add-ons that collect or transmit user data, the user must be informed…

Your add-on contains minified, concatenated or otherwise machine-generated code. You need to provide the original sources…

uBlock Origin’s developer gorhill refutes this with linked evidence.

Contrary to what these emails suggest, the source code files highlighted in the email:

  • Have nothing to do with data collection, there is no such thing anywhere in uBOL
  • There is no minified code in uBOL, and certainly none in the supposed faulty files

Even for people who did not prefer this add-on, the removal could have a chilling effect on uBlock Origin itself.

Incidentally, all the files reported as having issues are exactly the same files being used in uBO for years, and have been used in uBOL as well for over a year with no modification. Given this, it’s worrisome what could happen to uBO in the future.

And gorhill notes uBO Lite had a purpose on Firefox, especially on mobile devices:

[T]here were people who preferred the Lite approach of uBOL, which was designed from the ground up to be an efficient suspendable extension, thus a good match for Firefox for Android.

New releases of uBO Lite do not have a Firefox extension; the last version of this coincides with gorhill’s message. The Firefox addon page for uBO Lite is also gone.

  • LWD@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What an email to read. I find it particularly valuable for the things it does not say, but not at all encouraging.

    We are in the process of updating our privacy policy for additional clarity on all the points referenced in your email.

    They don’t say the TOS is incorrect or too broad. And they don’t say they will remove their promise to sell private data to advertisers.

    At this time, Fakespot does not sell or share any user data pursuant to any applicable privacy laws.

    At this time? Pursuant to the law? If Mozilla is abiding by law and nothing more, that explains why they are legally forced to admit they sell private data to advertisers.

    And the law is the lowest bar imaginable. Google operates under the law. Is Mozilla not better than them?

    … service providers who make Faksepot run…

    …and they can’t spell their own name right.

    • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      God, you’re exhausting. They don’t sell the data. Get over it. The email left no room for ambiguity. You’re reaching so far it’s embarrassing. Are you really that jaded?

      • LWD@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        You posted a privately sent email that contradicts a publicly accessible privacy policy. In the four weeks it took them to send that to you, nothing has been changed, same as the prior year. And they couldn’t even bother to spell their own product name right.

        Do you acknowledge that the privacy policy makes it extremely clear that they do sell private data, as outlined in the table that they made for people who struggle to read and mentally parse full paragraphs of text?

      • LWD@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Hey, it’s been a few weeks. Guess whether Mozilla has updated their privacy policy yet!

        It’s very clear what they say on their corporate website, right?