Can someone explain to me why it isn't possible to simply give users the option to influence whether an extension can make a request to a remote server?
This way one could simply disallow extensions to do anything that isn't happeninging locally.
This way one could simply disallow extensions to do anything that isn't happeninging locally.
The extension needs permission to modify documents on the hacker news domain. But if it can insert an <a> tag, what's to stop it from inserting an invisible <img href> tag, which could be used to exfiltrate data? Or even just inserting an <a> tag with an onClick handler, or a javascript: url?
Say you have an extension that ONLY wants access to mail.google.com. It might feel safer because it can't load in any third party scripts. But it can just as easily SEND data from your account as an email which it promptly deletes.
Same goes for LinkedIn, Facebook, HN, any interactive website can be used to exfiltrate data.