Tails

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2016-11-27 09:06:09

• Assignee set to sajolida
• QA Check set to Info Needed
• Affected tool set to Browser

> In TorBrowser, open Tools → Add-ons

> ‘Adblock Plus’ and ‘amnesia branding’ come with a disturbing warning

I guess it’s probably pretty hard to hide this warning. sajolida, how severe do you feel this is for UX? I guess it’s not very important, given we discourage users from installing add-ons, they should basically never have to even see this warning. I’m tempted to reassign to help desk who should add a FAQ about it. What do you think?

#2 Updated by sajolida 2016-12-26 10:55:33

• related to Feature #8469: Document the Amnesia-branding Add-on added

#3 Updated by sajolida 2016-12-26 10:55:59

• related to Bug #11419: Deal with mandatory extension signing post FF45esr added

#4 Updated by sajolida 2016-12-26 11:01:14

• Assignee changed from sajolida to intrigeri
• QA Check deleted (Info Needed)

> sajolida, how severe do you feel this is for UX?

I’ve no clue. Note that now that we have DAVE, we are actually asking people to install add-ons sometimes (eg. full upgrade) so more people might see this warning.

When I saw it myself, I could understand why “amnesia branding” was not verified (I thought “It’s custom to Tails so probably fine”) and we have Feature #8469 to document it. But I was more confused by Adblock Plus being unverified. I wondered why would the other ones be fine (Torbutton, NoScript, HTTPS Everywhere) but not this one. That’s my feedback as an expert user.

Now I also understand that we’ll have to solve this for real as part of Bug #11419. Or did I misunderstand?

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2016-12-26 13:46:47

• Status changed from Confirmed to Duplicate

> I’ve no clue. Note that now that we have DAVE, we are actually asking people to install add-ons sometimes (eg. full upgrade) so more people might see this warning.

Right.

> When I saw it myself, I could understand why “amnesia branding” was not verified (I thought “It’s custom to Tails so probably fine”) and we have Feature #8469 to document it. But I was more confused by Adblock Plus being unverified. I wondered why would the other ones be fine (Torbutton, NoScript, HTTPS Everywhere) but not this one. That’s my feedback as an expert user.

OK, thanks! That’s valuable. FYI Adblock Plus comes from Debian, so it can’t be signed by Mozilla’s signing key.

> Now I also understand that we’ll have to solve this for real as part of Bug #11419. Or did I misunderstand?

Yes, I think so (with “this” == “extensions cannot be verified which displays a warning”).

So I’m rejecting this ticket, on the grounds that it’s essentially a subset of Bug #11419.

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2016-12-26 13:47:25

• Assignee deleted (intrigeri)