I normally take the good faith interpretation for things like this, but I'm confused by this one.
What security problem would be addressed by this? Why would Mozilla need to disable "untrusted" extensions for only certain websites? Why would a website need to be quarentined from an extension, instead of the other way around?
I would think that the remote kill switch for a specific extension addresses the actual security concerns, or Mozilla just not allow 'untrusted extensions' by default on any website.
I don't think Mozilla is evil for doing this, but I do find the motivation for this confusing.
What security problem would be addressed by this? Why would Mozilla need to disable "untrusted" extensions for only certain websites? Why would a website need to be quarentined from an extension, instead of the other way around?
I would think that the remote kill switch for a specific extension addresses the actual security concerns, or Mozilla just not allow 'untrusted extensions' by default on any website.
I don't think Mozilla is evil for doing this, but I do find the motivation for this confusing.