How would I sign a firefox addon that a developer no longer has up on the addon page but I saved it ?

By max22
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

max22

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You'd have to submit it to Mozilla, but they'll only allow that if the original license allowed for you to do so.

So how do I find the original license holder ? So I can ask if it is ok ?

Someone already did it with the addon but it doesn't work right. The old one works great after manually installing it.

Grand Master

Anibal P

Posted
Posted

The alternative is compile firefox yourself and disable that sodding extension signing rubbish.

 

That's a horrible idea, up there with not using any AV or firewall on a computer 

The proper solution is to find a maintained extension that does the same thing, there is always an alternative 

Grand Master

n_K

Posted
Posted

 

That's a horrible idea, up there with not using any AV or firewall on a computer 

The proper solution is to find a maintained extension that does the same thing, there is always an alternative 

It's not even remotely related to not using a firewall or AV.

If I want to load an extension or make my own and use it, I damn well will, I couldn't give a ###### what mozilla try to do to stop me, you can't even compare someone writing an extension for a web browser and the browser having ###### unwanted 'you cant use this' protection against someone not using anti-virus software or a firewall to stop viruses/trojans/dodgy network traffic. Not even similar.

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

...

If I want to load an extension or make my own and use it, I damn well will, I couldn't give a ###### what mozilla try to do to stop me, you can't even compare someone writing an extension for a web browser and the browser having ###### unwanted 'you cant use this' protection against someone not using anti-virus software or a firewall to stop viruses/trojans/dodgy network traffic. Not even similar.

You know you don't have to pay to have your addons signed right? Simply uploading them to addons.mozilla.org results in them getting signed.

I have no idea why anybody would be upset about addon signing.

Grand Master

n_K

Posted
Posted

You know you don't have to pay to have your addons signed right? Simply uploading them to addons.mozilla.org results in them getting signed.

I have no idea why anybody would be upset about addon signing.

It's not about cost, why the heck should I have to upload what I've written to mozilla for something that is not going to be released just for them to 'inspect it'? That's like saying games companies should give away their games to motherboard manufacturers so they can 'inspect how it runs' on their motherboards and certify it.

Enthusiast

aldago

Posted
Posted

unpack the extension, update the manifest file, zip as xpi, submit for signing, get a link to the extension and use it for yourself. Worst case scenario: extension is rejected due to coding issues and you have to update the code.

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

It's not about cost, why the heck should I have to upload what I've written to mozilla for something that is not going to be released just for them to 'inspect it'? That's like saying games companies should give away their games to motherboard manufacturers so they can 'inspect how it runs' on their motherboards and certify it.

Then sign it yourself, Mozilla have said multiple time they aren't going to be the only people who can sign addons.

And game devs do give free copies of their games to hardware companies to see how it runs, it's great marketing for both of them.

Grand Master

+Warwagon MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Then sign it yourself, Mozilla have said multiple time they aren't going to be the only people who can sign addons.

But doesn't that defeat the purpose of signed addons if you can just sign it yourself.

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

No? The whole point of code signing is so that you know the file is unchanged from the author.

Anybody can take an addon and sign it, but they can't make it appear to be from the original author.

Grand Master

n_K

Posted
Posted (edited)

Then sign it yourself, Mozilla have said multiple time they aren't going to be the only people who can sign addons.

And game devs do give free copies of their games to hardware companies to see how it runs, it's great marketing for both of them.

Go and read the mozilla post on the issue, you cannot sign them yourself, they MUST be uploaded to mozilla and have them approve and sign them
Edit: Here you go; https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/02/10/extension-signing-safer-experience/

"Extension files that aren’t hosted on AMO will have to be submitted to AMO for signing. Developers will need to create accounts and a listing for their extension, which will not be public."

Enthusiast

aldago

Posted
Posted

Why not use the Firefox Developer Edition in this case?

because developer with e10 is crap (slow and constant crashes with flash). It's better to sign for your personal use the extension and be done with it.

Enthusiast

aldago

Posted
Posted

Well, as far as I know only Nightly and the Developer Edition (Aurora too?) has an override for the signing enforcement.

yes. I still think it's easier to submit the extension by yourself and get a signed version for your personal use (as long as you don't have to modify code to go through the automatic signing process) if you want to keep using a "stable" firefox version

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Ford execs say they made a mistake when they replaced human engineers with AI

      By PsYcHoKiLLa · Posted

      NO SHI... ?
    • Steam Summer Sale 2026 kicks off offering weeks of PC game discounts

      By cleverclogs · Posted

      We had no idea as kids how much time and energy it took to be an adult 😅
    • The Trump administration doesn't want you to use OpenAI's GPT-5.6 without its approval

      By David Uzondu · Posted

      The Trump administration doesn't want you to use OpenAI's GPT-5.6 without its approval by David Uzondu Image via @realDonalTrump (X) As OpenAI prepares the release of its next model, GPT 5.6, the White House has instructed the company to limit the distribution of the software to a small group of government-approved partners instead of the general public, as it has done with previous releases. According to The Information, OpenAI Chief Executive Officer Sam Altman sent an internal memo to staff on Thursday explaining that the federal government will approve access "customer by customer" during an initial preview phase. Altman noted in the communication that this restrictive rollout is "not [their] long-term model" for software deployment, and the company plans to work toward a "more sustainable" distribution method later. CNN said that both OpenAI and the Trump administration view the capabilities of GPT 5.6 on the same level as Anthropic's Mythos and that government officials intend to "collaborate with frontier AI labs to develop shared approaches for addressing the challenges of scaling this technology." The latest restriction comes just weeks after the US Commerce Department decided to restrict Fable, a version of Mythos with extra safety "guardrails" to prevent users from exploiting software vulnerabilities. Not long after the release, though, researchers at Amazon found a way to bypass these restrictions, prompting an aggressive response from federal authorities. The government ordered Anthropic to cut off access for non-US citizens located outside the US, non-US citizens living inside the US, and incredibly, even Anthropic's own foreign-born employees. Anthropic now appears to be building a workaround to resolve this compliance block with an update to its Privacy Policy that introduces a category called "Verification Data" to handle KYC and Digital IDs. This setup could mandate digital identity checks to filter users by nationality, requiring a government-issued ID and facial biometric data. Who knows? Maybe in the future, you would have to scan your US Passport or State ID to prove your citizenship before you are allowed to chat with Fable 5 (or any other model).
    • PowerToys is getting a new window management utility

      By matthiew · Posted

      When Windows 7 was released I created an AutoHotkey script that uses Alt+` as a keyboard shortcut to move a window across monitors. I have been using that script for over 15 years and this is the first time I have come across another app that uses the same shortcut!
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By +Edouard · Posted

  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Enthusiast
      Xonos went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      400
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      127
    4. 4
      neufuse
      69
    5. 5
      Xenon
      66
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!