Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Jun 2009 11:04 UTC, submitted by Rahul
.NET (dotGNU too) Microsoft is really making it hard not to distrust them, aren't they? We already talked about Mono and Moonlight this weekend, and now we're notified of something else. Apparently, the Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1, released earlier this year, installs a Firefox extension which could not be uninstalled easily (registry hacking was needed). To make matters worse, this extension came with a pretty big security hole (at least, that's what everyone says). A newer version of this extension has been pushed out in May, which can be uninstalled the proper way. As it turns out, Firefox apparently has a limitation in that extensions installed at the machine level (instead of the user level) cannot be uninstalled from within the extensions GUI.
Thread beginning with comment 366462
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Disable instead of remove?
by Valhalla on Mon 1st Jun 2009 12:26 UTC in reply to "Disable instead of remove?"
Valhalla
Member since:
2006-01-24

Well even so, you should be able to remove it totally since why should it be there if you don't want it in the first place?

As for the title blurb of -"As it turns out, Firefox apparently has a limitation in that extensions installed at the machine level (instead of the user level) cannot be uninstalled from within the extensions GUI."

Ehh... the way I see it this has to do with file ownership and account privileges. Installing NET requires admin rights and as such any Firefox extensions installed by that NET package will be created by the admin account and thus the resulting files will be owned by the admin and not removeable by Firefox when running under a limited account.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Ehh... the way I see it this has to do with file ownership and account privileges. Installing NET requires admin rights and as such any Firefox extensions installed by that NET package will be created by the admin account and thus the resulting files will be owned by the admin and not removeable by Firefox when running under a limited account.


...in which case Firefox should notify you of this, and offer an elevation prompt - which it doesn't. Hence, a limitation in Firefox.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Ehh... the way I see it this has to do with file ownership and account privileges. Installing NET requires admin rights and as such any Firefox extensions installed by that NET package will be created by the admin account and thus the resulting files will be owned by the admin and not removeable by Firefox when running under a limited account.

...in which case Firefox should notify you of this, and offer an elevation prompt - which it doesn't. Hence, a limitation in Firefox.


And thus you enter into the realm of Kaiwai's argument as to why multi platform applications suck when there is an attempt to try and cater for every platform with no effort to customising each release for each platform - you have the worst of all worlds.

Reply Parent Score: 3