I too enjoy having a big brother to make these difficult decisions for me.
People are getting to be such sheep. I guess that what happens in a welfare country.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I too enjoy having a big brother to make these difficult decisions for me.
People are getting to be such sheep. I guess that what happens in a welfare country.
I wouldn't say I'm angry, though I am a bit surprised and a bit perturbed. At this point, I do kind of expect this kind of thing from Apple, but it's atypical for Microsoft. The bottom line is that nobody has any business installing or updating Firefox add-ons without notifying me. The only company I approve of doing that is Mozilla, as it's their software that I'm consenting to using.It looks like phide is the only angry at Microsoft so far. Maybe Terry too for posting it?
Microsoft said:A key goal of ClickOnce is to provide a trustworthy deployment model for users to be able to download and execute applications from centrally managed servers without requiring administrator privileges on the client machine. They are deployed in a safe manner that prevents ClickOnce deployed applications from interfering with or corrupting any other applications or data on the client. Applications deployed using ClickOnce also need to run in a secure execution context whose permissions are limited based on where the application is coming from or the trust assigned to the originator of that application.
The issue isn't the plugin per se.For crying out loud do some of you ever bother to Google anything? You're all making a huge deal out of nothing. ClickOnce is mainly a security feature for .NET apps that are launched from central servers. God forbid MS supports it on a 3rd party browser.
I too enjoy having a big brother to make these difficult decisions for me.
People are getting to be such sheep. I guess that what happens in a welfare country.
True that bro'
As for Terry, why would I be mad at Terry? Or are you just attempting to start something...?
Can't "simply" uninstall it. I am the adminstrator, yet uninstall is greyed out. I can disable though. I can do the regedit procedure sure, but my point is that most people cannot. I suppose I could add/remove .NET 3.5 SP1 though and see if that works. Again, something most people won't bother to do. If so, then the argument becomes: why is .NET 3.5 a critical update? It should be optional. I just installed it to test that out, it was listed as critical. Likely, since I had .NET 2.0 for my ATI CCC.
A false sense of security is worse than no security. If people think FF is safe, now MS installs a backdoor as a "Critical Update," then they are potentially putting themselves at risk by thinking they are safer than using IE.
I guess i dont see the problem, they installed a FF addon and people act like its a freaking virus jacking their credit card numbers...
The issue isn't the plugin per se.
The issue is the plugin is installed silently and allows remote code execution. This is typically something you want to ask the user about before installing.
Wikipedia said:ClickOnce employs CAS (Code Access Security) to ensure that system functions cannot be called by a ClickOnce application from the web, ensuring the security of data and the client system in general.
Picasa adds an addon silently to FF.
Java installs an addon to FF as well silently.
Quicktime installs an addon to FF silently.
MS Office 2007 does the same thing.
The reason being that we don't see any news posts about it. You assume some sort of anti-Microsoft vitriol when it's really just a case of "it's shitty when vendors silently install Firefox add-ons", and Microsoft just so happens to be the main focus of this particular story. If it were Apple, I'd be here bashing Apple. Google, I'd be bashing Google.So like many other pieces of software out there as well? Yet I don't see anybody bitching about those commonly used ones.
I think the implication is meant to be that .net is a microsoft product, and therefore a massive security disaster area that can be used by hackers to re-write your will and mug your aunt, so having a .net extension into the bullet-proof ultra secure Firefox is tantamount to doing a barrel roll with a loaded shotgun in your mouth.
Yep. Actually fairly similar to what's going on here, and not something I'm a big fan of either.
Hmm, I could of swore I made a thread about this somewhere... http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1420180
I was going to mention I had the option to uninstall 1.1 (not greyed out) on my system as well. But then, I'm running Win7 and didn't install a Service Pack. I see all sorts of hysteria about removing it, but I don't see anything on what it's purpose is, or why it can be helpful. I would assume that it provides some level of compatibility between Firefox and various MS apps? I know with Sharepoint, I still have to switch to IE (or IEtab) for full functionality.
The reason being that we don't see any news posts about it. You assume some sort of anti-Microsoft vitriol when it's really just a case of "it's shitty when vendors silently install Firefox add-ons", and Microsoft just so happens to be the main focus of this particular story. If it were Apple, I'd be here bashing Apple. Google, I'd be bashing Google.
And as for QuickTime, you're made aware that it installs a plug-in during setup.
A question for you: if Apple did something similar, what would your opinion be of that?
Why is it "junk"? Are we supposed to be completely okay with Microsoft reaching into our third-party applications, installing extensions to those applications we don't want, then denying us the ability to uninstall those extensions? That's acceptable practice for an OS vendor, is it?
Nah, I don't think so, bub.
OWN'd.
Someone has to complain about Microsoft doing SOMETHING... Damned if they do and damned if they don't, seriously.So exactly what is the big deal?
I hate to fall back to this "it's the principle of it!"-type argument, but that's pretty much what it boils down to. I assume the add-on itself is almost entirely harmless. It certainly never impacted the way I use my machine or caused any problems that I'm aware of, but that doesn't mean Microsoft reaching into third-party applications is okay.I generally dislike it when MS does phantom updates, but this one is much ado about nothing.
In this thread alone I already said Java shouldn't do that (and in any case I seem to recall a prompt notifying the user for the JRE). But just to make it very clear, all those other examples you listed shouldn't do it either. Are you happy?So like many other pieces of software out there as well?
Picasa adds an addon silently to FF.
Java installs an addon to FF as well silently.
Quicktime installs an addon to FF silently.
MS Office 2007 does the same thing.
Yet I don't see anybody bitching about those commonly used ones.
Look at it from MS point of view too... When they present a check-box or prompt to people asking if they want a .Net Firefox plug-in for OneClick functionality the vast majority of average users are gonna go "what??".
Yeah, let me know when they do that.
See, because Firefox is this much vaunted Open Sores (not a typo,) there's supposed to be these magical gatekeepers who could have told Microsoft "no, you can't add that." Especially when it wasn't Microsoft who did it - it was Firefox.
So of course, the zealots would rather stick their further up where it's at, and ignore those inconvenient facts.
Why does it necessarily have to "negatively affect" anyone for me to be against it? If I wanted to be picky about it, I could say it takes up real estate in the add-ons screen and consumes some minor amount of memory despite the fact that it serves me no real purpose whatsoever (and cannot be easily uninstalled). I think those are perfectly reasonable gripes. That's not even mentioning potential security risks.
When it comes to computing, my stance is that if it isn't necessary, odds are I don't want it. When I don't have a choice, that's a very serious issue as far as I'm concerned.
Firefox is not an operating system, nor is it Microsoft's software. Firefox is a third-party application that Microsoft doesn't need to be modifying without my express permission.Microsoft put in millions of other codes into the operating system without your approval too.
The .NET add-on does nothing to "maintain a healthy operating system". On my machine, it's done nothing but sit idly, consuming memory and serving absolutely no purpose whatsoever. We aren't even perfectly certain it doesn't have any exploitable vulnerabilities (given that it's Microsoft software, odds are quite good it does).They'll do what's needed to maintain a healthy operating system. If they fuck up, they'll try and fix it.
They bundle solitaire, a separate application, with Windows. Firefox is a third-party, user-installed application. What business do they have installing extensions to it without so much as notifying me or giving me an option to decline its installation?Oh noes they put Solitaire in your system
Stop dissembling. I never said there was no difference. And you need to get your facts straight: Apple never "snuck in" Safari in any iTunes/QuickTime update. Apple mischaracterized what Safari was in the Apple Software Update and selected it for installation by default, and it could easily be deselected prior to updating. It's not as if it was installed without notification and designed to be impossible to uninstall except via the registry like the .NET add-on.It's worlds apart from Apple sneaking in Safari in a Quicktime/iTune update. If you can't see the difference, then there's little hope for you.
This is the third time I've seen this overused cliché in this thread. Is it really that much of a strain to think independently?Take your tin foil hat off.
Firefox is not an operating system, nor is it Microsoft's software. Firefox is a third-party application that Microsoft doesn't need to be modifying without my express permission.
The .NET add-on does nothing to "maintain a healthy operating system". On my machine, it's done nothing but sit idly, consuming memory and serving absolutely no purpose whatsoever. We aren't even perfectly certain it doesn't have any exploitable vulnerabilities (given that it's Microsoft software, odds are quite good it does).
They bundle solitaire, a separate application, with Windows. Firefox is a third-party, user-installed application. What business do they have installing extensions to it without so much as notifying me or giving me an option to decline its installation?
Stop dissembling. I never said there was no difference. And you need to get your facts straight: Apple never "snuck in" Safari in any iTunes/QuickTime update. Apple mischaracterized what Safari was in the Apple Software Update and selected it for installation by default, and it could easily be deselected prior to updating. It's not as if it was installed without notification and designed to be impossible to uninstall except via the registry like the .NET add-on.
This is the third time I've seen this overused cliché in this thread. Is it really that much of a strain to think independently?
I don't consider them an evil empire. Far from it, in fact (read the rest of the thread, Azhar). That doesn't necessarily mean I should be as subservient to their occasional negligent practices as most here seem to be, and I certainly don't feel any compulsion to pray to the altar of Microsoft on a daily basis. They shouldn't get a pass just because they're Microsoft, for Christ's sake.Is it that much of a strain to stop thinking of Microsoft as an overblown evil empire?
I assume it follows the basic laws of computing whereby memory registers are used to store data, but, you know, that's just me and my silly assumptions.I'd love to see you back up your claim about .Net consume memory when operating Firefox.
I don't consider them an evil empire. Far from it, in fact (read the rest of the thread, Azhar). That doesn't necessarily mean I should be as subservient to their occasional negligent practices as most here seem to be, and I certainly don't feel any compulsion to pray to the altar of Microsoft on a daily basis. They shouldn't get a pass just because they're Microsoft, for Christ's sake.
I assume it follows the basic laws of computing whereby memory registers are used to store data, but, you know, that's just me and my silly assumptions.
W7 update added it for me. I do have the option to uninstall.
What really had me pissed? The update changed my home page to MSN on FF.