Mozilla, the maker of the popular web browser Firefox, said it received government demands to block add-ons that circumvent censorship.

The Mozilla Foundation, the entity behind the web browser Firefox, is blocking various censorship circumvention add-ons for its browser, including ones specifically to help those in Russia bypass state censorship. The add-ons were blocked at the request of Russia’s federal censorship agency, Roskomnadzor — the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media — according to a statement by Mozilla to The Intercept.

“Following recent regulatory changes in Russia, we received persistent requests from Roskomnadzor demanding that five add-ons be removed from the Mozilla add-on store,” a Mozilla spokesperson told The Intercept in response to a request for comment. “After careful consideration, we’ve temporarily restricted their availability within Russia. Recognizing the implications of these actions, we are closely evaluating our next steps while keeping in mind our local community.”

“It’s a kind of unpleasant surprise because we thought the values of this corporation were very clear in terms of access to information.”

Stanislav Shakirov, the chief technical officer of Roskomsvoboda, a Russian open internet group, said he hoped it was a rash decision by Mozilla that will be more carefully examined.

“It’s a kind of unpleasant surprise because we thought the values of this corporation were very clear in terms of access to information, and its policy was somewhat different,” Shakirov said. “And due to these values, it should not be so simple to comply with state censors and fulfill the requirements of laws that have little to do with common sense.”

Developers of digital tools designed to get around censorship began noticing recently that their Firefox add-ons were no longer available in Russia.

On June 8, the developer of Censor Tracker, an add-on for bypassing internet censorship restrictions in Russia and other former Soviet countries, made a post on the Mozilla Foundation’s discussion forums saying that their extension was unavailable to users in Russia.

The developer of another add-on, Runet Censorship Bypass, which is specifically designed to bypass Roskomnadzor censorship, posted in the thread that their extension was also blocked. The developer said they did not receive any notification from Mozilla regarding the block.

Two VPN add-ons, Planet VPN and FastProxy — the latter explicitly designed for Russian users to bypass Russian censorship — are also blocked. VPNs, or virtual private networks, are designed to obscure internet users’ locations by routing users’ traffic through servers in other countries.

The Intercept verified that all four add-ons are blocked in Russia. If the webpage for the add-on is accessed from a Russian IP address, the Mozilla add-on page displays a message: “The page you tried to access is not available in your region.” If the add-on is accessed with an IP address outside of Russia, the add-on page loads successfully.

Supervision of Communications

Roskomnadzor is responsible for “control and supervision in telecommunications, information technology, and mass communications,” according to the Russia’s federal censorship agency’s English-language page.

In March, the New York Times reported that Roskomnadzor was increasing its operations to restrict access to censorship circumvention technologies such as VPNs. In 2018, there were multiple user reports that Roskomnadzor had blocked access to the entire Firefox Add-on Store.

According to Mozilla’s Pledge for a Healthy Internet, the Mozilla Foundation is “committed to an internet that includes all the peoples of the earth — where a person’s demographic characteristics do not determine their online access, opportunities, or quality of experience.” Mozilla’s second principle in their manifesto says, “The internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible.”

The Mozilla Foundation, which in tandem with its for-profit arm Mozilla Corporation releases Firefox, also operates its own VPN service, Mozilla VPN. However, it is only available in 33 countries, a list that doesn’t include Russia.

The same four censorship circumvention add-ons also appear to be available for other web browsers without being blocked by the browsers’ web stores. Censor Tracker, for instance, remains available for the Google Chrome web browser, and the Chrome Web Store page for the add-on works from Russian IP addresses. The same holds for Runet Censorship Bypass, VPN Planet, and FastProxy.

“In general, it’s hard to recall anyone else who has done something similar lately,” said Shakirov, the Russian open internet advocate. “For the last few months, Roskomnadzor (after the adoption of the law in Russia that prohibits the promotion of tools for bypassing blockings) has been sending such complaints about content to everyone.”

      • Dendr0@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Neither, as they rely on Firefox. Waterfox, while decent, does raise an eyebrow as it was bought out by an ad company. LibreWolf is only good as long as the underlying Firefox code it’s built on stays as pliable as it is.

        And before you ask, I dont actually recommend any browser. They’re ALL shit. And I quite literally mean ALL.

  • Nioxic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    im not TOO surprised.

    they’re a non-profit company after all. they’re not political activists etc.

    that said, it hardly matters, because its open source.

  • ᴅᴜᴋᴇᴛʜᴏʀɪᴏɴ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Maybe if all tech companies told Russia and China to fuck off, they’d all get banned in those two countries, further isolating their citizenry, in hope that those citizens would eventually get fed up and say enough is enough, through whatever means necessary.

    I’m sure plenty of Russians and Chinese put up with their governments, but are they willing to become North Koreas?

    • MehBlah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not likely from what I’ve read the majority of russians don’t have flushing toilets. So the internet is probably a few notches down on the whole basic needs thing.

      • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m genuinely curious why? I may have worded it strongly, but as a Russian, there are very few things as unethical to me as cooperation of any kind with the Russian government.

        • mke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Would you be happier if they ignored the demands and possibly got Firefox banned in Russia? Because if so, it’s not that we disagree over our views of the Russian government. Probably neither do Mozilla.

          We have different priorities. I want the average Russian to be easily able to install Firefox, even if it takes more work to load some extensions. You seem to want to cut off your nose to spite your face.

          I’m genuinely curious why.

          • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Would you be happier if they ignored the demands and possibly got Firefox banned in Russia?

            Yes, having a web browser banned is absurd and impossible to do in practice, it would be largely inconsequential overall, before you even consider the thousands of forks of Firefox.

            Taking down extensions makes them much much harder to get because they are relatively obscure and are usually hosted in one place only - on the extension store, unless you’re lucky and they have a binary on a GitHub.

            I want the average Russian to be easily able to use Firefox, even if it takes more work to load some extensions.

            I want the average Russian to be easily able to bypass censorship that blocks out truth in favor of misinformation of their government that gets people onboard with a war that’s killed tens of thousands.

            What browser they use to do that I care much less about, not that they’ll be able to block Firefox or it’s thousands of forks from every page that hosts builds, installers or even OS ISOs with package on disc, but whatever one they have the extensions need to be available on the store - otherwise they can be extremely hard to find.

            I think we simply disagree about the effect of taking down an extension vs “blocking” a browser may be.

            • mke@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I stand corrected, I see your argument about the comparative difficulty and effect of banning a browser vs an extension. The discoverability of the extension alone is a big point.

              Not sure I agree with how you seemingly downplay the damage banning the browser could cause and fail to consider consider other ways people could organize to distribute extensions (even as you mention various ways to get Firefox, I’m a bit confused on this one). Others have already talked about this in the thread, so I won’t repeat it here.

              With all that said, it seems we were both fools. Mozilla has returned the extensions already. It was neither about protecting Firefox in Russia, nor a case of “Fuck Mozilla.”

  • preasket@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Better than Firefox being blocked in Russia. Addons can be added from files anyway.

  • Xero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Dammit, Firefox! You was the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the anti-privacy, not join them! You were to bring security to the internet, not leave it in neo-naZi’s propaganda.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It was clear what has happened since XULRunner and alternative Gecko browsers became unwanted.

        Like now WebKit is sometimes the basis for alternative browsers for people who need something patient and usable. Or QtWebEngine, but that’s Chromium.

        Before they did this, Gecko was the one to be picked the most for such usage.

    • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Probably, or employees’ families maybe?
      “That’s a nice little nephew you got there, it would be a shame if something happened to him “.

  • kuneho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Are these only “just” pulled from the online catalog, or the browser itself blocks installation too from file?

    If the prior, I don’t really like this action, but my browser won’t change because of it (for now?) and also Mozilla and Firefox served me well in the past almost 20 years since I use it, I trust these guys.

    If the latter… that could be a different story.

    • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Are these only “just” pulled from the online catalog, or the browser itself blocks installation too from file?

      The Intercept verified that all four add-ons are blocked in Russia. If the webpage for the add-on is accessed from a Russian IP address, the Mozilla add-on page displays a message: “The page you tried to access is not available in your region.” If the add-on is accessed with an IP address outside of Russia, the add-on page loads successfully.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Stanislav Shakirov, the chief technical officer of Roskomsvoboda, a Russian open internet group, said he hoped it was a rash decision by Mozilla that will be more carefully examined.

    “It’s a kind of unpleasant surprise because we thought the values of this corporation were very clear in terms of access to information, and its policy was somewhat different,” Shakirov said.

    Developers of digital tools designed to get around censorship began noticing recently that their Firefox add-ons were no longer available in Russia.

    Roskomnadzor is responsible for “control and supervision in telecommunications, information technology, and mass communications,” according to the Russia’s federal censorship agency’s English-language page.

    In March, the New York Times reported that Roskomnadzor was increasing its operations to restrict access to censorship circumvention technologies such as VPNs.

    “For the last few months, Roskomnadzor (after the adoption of the law in Russia that prohibits the promotion of tools for bypassing blockings) has been sending such complaints about content to everyone.”


    The original article contains 703 words, the summary contains 160 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • barnaclebutt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You don’t need one. It is easy to install an xpi in Firefox. The app store isn’t necessary. I.e., no walled garden. I wouldn’t blame Mozilla here.

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You don’t need one. It is easy to install an xpi in Firefox

        [CITATION NEEDED]

        The access to install xpis is (irony intended) censored in “retail” Firefox.

        • azuth@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Myself, just installed soundfixer via .xpi on windows 10 Firefox.

          There is also no such thing as a “retail” Firefox.

      • Starmina@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s plain wrong ? Last time I checked you can only do that on developer edition of Firefox otherwise you can only install it as a « temporary extension » that remove itself on next restart. Unless I’m missing something ?

        • azuth@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          For xpis that are on the store it’s absolutely correct. Which is the case here. It can be downloaded once and redistributed in any way (sneakernet) and installed offline.

        • GreatDong3000@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Last time I checked it only made the extension temporsry if the extension wasn’t signed by the developer. If you made your own extension you need to use the developer signing tool on it before installing.

          • barnaclebutt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I just checked. Manage Your Extensions -> Install Add-on From File…

            Super easy. Am I missing something here? I don’t have any extra restrictions or steps at all. I have Bypass Paywalls Clean installed from a github build without any issue.

            • Starmina@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              well okay, indeed I was wrong it seems tied to signing, however I thought Mozilla revoked that signature once it removed it from their store.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Firefox?

      This is only in the country that has regulatory authority, Russian, and is stated as temporary so Mozilla can figure out what to do about it.

      • Weslee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Honestly it looks like corpo speak for “we’re waiting for everyone to forget so we can sweep it under the rug”.

    • Psych@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m surprised I’m typing this but chrome. Getting major villain turning good to do something good very unexpectedly vibe .

      • Weslee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Don’t use brave if you care about privacy, they claim to be privacy focused but will sell you out the first chance they get (which they already did)

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        No. Brave is merely Chrome with extra steps. And it’s associated with lots of “web3” / crypto scams.

          • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Better to crush their spirit now, before it can be misled by lies; so that it can crash and burn and be reborn in the Fire of the Fox, as a Libre Wolf.

            Or, if they prefer a more compact fursona, a Fennec.

  • cm0002@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wow, wtf Firefox? Not even Chrome is blocking some of the add-ons…

    Guess enshittification is starting to creep into Firefox now too

    • FeelThePower@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It has been since proton imo. only one person in my group is still on the base version of the fox, the rest of us have preferred forks.

    • ArtVandelay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Think about it, pretend you are the Mozilla CEO. You get a request demand from Putin that you block these addons, and you have two options. A) Make a stink and stick to your principles, of which Putin has none, and so you get Firefox banned in Russia altogether. Now, Russians who want to use it cannot, and are forced to use other browsers that Putin can control. or B) Comply with the request, knowing users can still load extensions from the side.

      Only one of these two options leads to the possibility of Russians being able to use Firefox with these addons, and it’s B.

      Oh and fuck Putin, just because.

      • Cloudless ☼@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        When should an organisation stop complying with totalitarian governments? First they stop the extensions.

        What if they request for Firefox to add site filters, or else?

        What if China demands similar bans for extensions related to Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet etc?

        It can go on and on. Some baselines should not be negotiable.

      • mangaskahn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        They chose to comply with the request and become one of the browsers Putin can control. Not sure how Mozilla gets credit for anything good here.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Did you read the article? No? Cmon. You should start doing that before drawing conclusions.

      This is noted as a temporary block on the specific extensions ONLY within the country with regulatory power to ban Firefox. Russia.

      Mozilla has stated this is temporary so they can have the breathing room to figure out how to navigate this. Since this goes against their principles.

      It’s either Firefox is banned in Russia, or they do this. Which causes more harm? That’s a rough choice for them to need to make.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Mozilla is a for-profit company, “temporary” = “quiet permanent” especially coupled with the secrecy and attempts to keep things quiet.

        Yea, no, this isn’t going to be “temporary”

      • Weslee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Your biggest mistake is trusting the word of a corporation.

        If it was a good faith action why would they do it in secret, why not make a post about it and informing everyone before hand about the situation?

        For me, all evidence points to them hoping no one would notice and “temporary” would roll over into permanently.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Besides, this instance isn’t even enshittification anyway.

          Enshittification is when a company makes the user experience worse to squeeze more money out of them. This is just government regulation.

              • cm0002@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Not really, they’re a for profit company with very little market share and as a result very little wiggle room to, say, be banned from an entire market region

                They’re protecting profits over people like so many other companies do. Mozilla Firefox is no savior, they’ll protect their profits just like any other.

                • kakes@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Protecting profits isn’t the same as trying to squeeze more profits. If companies were enacting bad policy out of legitimate concern for their business (as is the case here), it wouldn’t necessarily be an issue.

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              If they get kicked out of the Russian market then those extensions wouldn’t be available there anyway.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah me too, but can we not discuss it in a more nuanced and useful way than just shoving this word into every single post on Lemmy?

          • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            If things would stop getting shittier, then yes. I’m not entirely sure that it applies here so I understand your annoyance, but you’re seeing “enshittification” everywhere because we’re seeing the practice of enshittification everywhere. I applaud it being called out. We shouldn’t be seeing higher prices for worse experiences, but that’s the current trend. If you’re tired of seeing the word, then it’d probably be a good idea to take a break from c/technology because I don’t think it’s stopping any time soon.

            • kakes@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I think we see it so much because kids on the internet think it’s fun to say. It’s dismissive and stifles meaningful conversation.

              • MagicShel@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I think it describes a phenomenon we’ve seen repeated over and over almost without variation. Every single internet service slowly gets shittier as they switch from investment to returning investment. Everything going back to MySpace and Yahoo Spaces went from awesome to abandoned as soon as they started trying to monetize the platform they built. It’s fair to have a word for that and observing the inevitability.

                Does it do any good if it is inevitable? I don’t know. The Fediverse seems to be a direct reaction to it, and I’d like to see more.

                • kakes@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I don’t disagree that the word should exist, I’m saying it’s become overused to the point of becoming meaningless. Take this entire thread, for instance. This is not enshittification - yet, here we are.

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              We’re not, though. The word “enshittification” was coined to describe a very specific kind of shittiness, not just a general “I don’t like this development.”

              Now that the word is being used in the more general sense, though, we’ve lost a useful way of referring to just that very specific kind of shittiness. We already had plenty of ways to say “I don’t like this development” so this is a net loss for the descriptiveness of language.

    • vvv@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not even Chrome is blocking some of the add-ons…

      is that something you know for sure? or has Google quietly complied with similar requests, without making a statement like Mozilla has here?

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s in the article

        The same four censorship circumvention add-ons also appear to be available for other web browsers without being blocked by the browsers’ web stores. Censor Tracker, for instance, remains available for the Google Chrome web browser, and the Chrome Web Store page for the add-on works from Russian IP addresses. The same holds for Runet Censorship Bypass, VPN Planet, and FastProxy.

    • englislanguage@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Does the add-on work the same way in Chrome? Or does Google break it in a way similar to uBlock Origin with the WebExtensions v3 update?

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This comment section is a great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect playing out in real time