Extension signing and global installation

[avhei...@googlemail.com]

I used to install some firefox extensions at our site globally, i.e. by unpacking and placing them in a folder in /usr/lib/firefox-addons/extensions/<Extension-UUID> (which on Ubuntu is a hardlink to /usr/lib/firefox/browser/extensions).

Since Firefox 40, I now get a warning that the extension in question is not a signed extension, even though it is. Not a problem until now, but it will become one when Mozilla enforces extension signing.

When I install the same XPI in the user profile, everything is OK.

Strangely this does not happen with AdblockPlus, but it does happen with HTTPSEverywhere, NoScript or VideoDownloadHelper.

I already asked NoScript support, but we couldn't come up with any solution.

[Jorge Villalobos]

Hello,

We had a problem with the signing system after the move to AWS (a couple
of weeks ago), and a number of add-on files were incorrectly signed.
They still install correctly in Firefox via the usual mechanism, but
won't work correctly if you try to install them from a global location.

I think that later this week we will run a script that correctly signs
(again) all of them, which should fix the problem.

Jorge

[opensense...@gmail.com]

I am having this exact same problem. An extension which installs and runs just fine in a user's browser is disabled when installed globally in /usr/lib//firefox-addons/extensions/ ( unless xpinstall.signatures.required is set to false - but that workaround won't work in a week)

Is there any fix for this?

[Jorge Villalobos]

On 1/18/16 2:33 PM, opensense...@gmail.com wrote:
> I am having this exact same problem. An extension which installs and runs just fine in a user's browser is disabled when installed globally in /usr/lib//firefox-addons/extensions/ ( unless xpinstall.signatures.required is set to false - but that workaround won't work in a week)
>
> Is there any fix for this?
>

Which extension are you referring to? What's its ID?

Jorge

[avhei...@googlemail.com]

>
> Which extension are you referring to? What's its ID?
>
> Jorge

Problem still persists with NoScript 2.9.0.3 (ID {73a6fe31-595d-460b-a920-fcc0f8843232}) and Firefox 44.0 on Ubuntu 12.04.5 x86_64.

Luckily removal of xpinstall.signatures.required has been delayed until FF 46, but this is a real show stopper.

[Dave Townsend]

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:29 AM, <avhei...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Which extension are you referring to? What's its ID?
>>
>> Jorge
>

> Problem still persists with NoScript 2.9.0.3 (ID {73a6fe31-595d-460b-a920-fcc0f8843232}) and Firefox 44.0 on Ubuntu 12.04.5 x86_64.
>
> Luckily removal of xpinstall.signatures.required has been delayed until FF 46, but this is a real show stopper.

Please can you file a bug on this so we can track and investigate it.
So far all of our testing suggests that this is working just fine.

[avhei...@googlemail.com]

> Please can you file a bug on this so we can track and investigate it.
> So far all of our testing suggests that this is working just fine.

I will test some more before doing this. I just found out that this problem does not occur when using a Live CD of Ubuntu with firefox upgraded to 44.0.

So I guess this is either some weird Ubuntu problem or some problem with our installation.

@opensense... What OS are you using?

[gagl...@gmail.com]

I'm seeing the problem with Ubuntu 12.04.5 LTS trying to use the signed version of Rkiosk 0.9.01-signed. I am placing the needed xpi file in /usr/share/mozilla/exensions and give it a filename with the appid and xpi extension