Reviews for Bookmark search plus 2
Bookmark search plus 2 by aaFn
Review by DeLaPiscina
Rated 5 out of 5
by DeLaPiscina, 4 years ago2022-06-11
Updated / Upgraded Review:
Hello aaFn. I'm upgrading my review to 5 stars since you fixed the multi-select issue! Good job! Thanks.
BTW, I found this reply of yours to another user's review while searching for updated info regarding multi-selection:
"Hello @Bagus, you will be happy to see that now multi-selection is available, as of 2.0.103 :-)"
I'm wondering what "2.0.103" means? Oh well. Thanks again! Your add-on has come in very handy often!
-------------------
2022-02-03
Updated / Upgraded Review:
Based on your reply to my security concerns I finally decided to install your add-on. I just installed it, and gave it a quick spin. It appears to work as intended. so, thanks for that.
I hope you get some time soon to upgrade Bsp2 so users can select more than one bookmark at the same time –as you indicated you intend to. BTW, I upgraded Bsp2 from 3 to 4 stars. Please fix multiselect so I can give it 5! Thanks again!
---------------------
Original Review (left in 2020ish):
I used to have the Alice0775 Go Parent Folder Extension, and like many, many others I've been looking for a suitable replacement ever since FF 57. I read through a good many of the reviews for, Bsp2, and I am impressed! I really do want to use it. However, I don't understand how one is expected to trust this extension (as well as many others out there) when the following happens:
1. At the top of the extension's home page this warning is prominently displayed:
"This is not monitored for security through Mozilla's Recommended Extensions program. Make sure you trust it before installing."
2. Then, in the Permissions section one reads:
'Access your data for all websites' which, at least for me, raises flags right away.
3. Of course, one then obviously follows the link being offered in this same 'Permissions' section which reads: 'Learn more about permissions'. That link then leads one to the explanations page:
'Permission request messages for Firefox extensions'
4. There, one can read the particular explanation for the specific permission:
'Access your data for all websites'
which states:
"The extension can read the content of any web page you visit as well as data you enter into those web pages, such as usernames and passwords."
Say what? Call me paranoid, but at that point my brain is already thinking, "There is no way I'm installing this thing!" And granted, the explanation does go on to say:
"Extensions requesting this permission might:
-Offer a password manager that reads and writes details of your username and password"
However, that explanation does little to assuage my fears that my usernames and passwords will become accessible, and possibly be misused.
In all seriousness, I would be elated to know that there is a worthy, and possibly better, replacement for 'Go Parent Folder'; and that once again I'm able to find the parent folder to my thousands of bookmarks with just a couple of clicks. For me however, this permissions (overreach) issue really stands in the way. As I said, I read many of the reviews for Bsp2, as well as the many thoughtful replies, and it does seem this extension's creator is well intended.
Searching for the word 'password' in all the reviews, it appears I'm the only one who has pointed out this issue, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way though. Perhaps, I'm simply just the only one whose taken the time to bring it up. I would venture to say that many potential users are being spooked by the wording of the permission descriptions and explanations. AaFn, please shed some light on this issue. I really want to use your app!
Updated / Upgraded Review:
Hello aaFn. I'm upgrading my review to 5 stars since you fixed the multi-select issue! Good job! Thanks.
BTW, I found this reply of yours to another user's review while searching for updated info regarding multi-selection:
"Hello @Bagus, you will be happy to see that now multi-selection is available, as of 2.0.103 :-)"
I'm wondering what "2.0.103" means? Oh well. Thanks again! Your add-on has come in very handy often!
-------------------
2022-02-03
Updated / Upgraded Review:
Based on your reply to my security concerns I finally decided to install your add-on. I just installed it, and gave it a quick spin. It appears to work as intended. so, thanks for that.
I hope you get some time soon to upgrade Bsp2 so users can select more than one bookmark at the same time –as you indicated you intend to. BTW, I upgraded Bsp2 from 3 to 4 stars. Please fix multiselect so I can give it 5! Thanks again!
---------------------
Original Review (left in 2020ish):
I used to have the Alice0775 Go Parent Folder Extension, and like many, many others I've been looking for a suitable replacement ever since FF 57. I read through a good many of the reviews for, Bsp2, and I am impressed! I really do want to use it. However, I don't understand how one is expected to trust this extension (as well as many others out there) when the following happens:
1. At the top of the extension's home page this warning is prominently displayed:
"This is not monitored for security through Mozilla's Recommended Extensions program. Make sure you trust it before installing."
2. Then, in the Permissions section one reads:
'Access your data for all websites' which, at least for me, raises flags right away.
3. Of course, one then obviously follows the link being offered in this same 'Permissions' section which reads: 'Learn more about permissions'. That link then leads one to the explanations page:
'Permission request messages for Firefox extensions'
4. There, one can read the particular explanation for the specific permission:
'Access your data for all websites'
which states:
"The extension can read the content of any web page you visit as well as data you enter into those web pages, such as usernames and passwords."
Say what? Call me paranoid, but at that point my brain is already thinking, "There is no way I'm installing this thing!" And granted, the explanation does go on to say:
"Extensions requesting this permission might:
-Offer a password manager that reads and writes details of your username and password"
However, that explanation does little to assuage my fears that my usernames and passwords will become accessible, and possibly be misused.
In all seriousness, I would be elated to know that there is a worthy, and possibly better, replacement for 'Go Parent Folder'; and that once again I'm able to find the parent folder to my thousands of bookmarks with just a couple of clicks. For me however, this permissions (overreach) issue really stands in the way. As I said, I read many of the reviews for Bsp2, as well as the many thoughtful replies, and it does seem this extension's creator is well intended.
Searching for the word 'password' in all the reviews, it appears I'm the only one who has pointed out this issue, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way though. Perhaps, I'm simply just the only one whose taken the time to bring it up. I would venture to say that many potential users are being spooked by the wording of the permission descriptions and explanations. AaFn, please shed some light on this issue. I really want to use your app!
Developer response
posted 4 years agoHello @DeLaPiscina, thank you for taking the time to write that review.
There are really 2 points:
1. Statement at top of the extension's home page.
This is Mozilla's approach, and yes I believe that even than if gentler than initially conceived by them, it would be more factual and generating less anxiety if it could have 3 values instead of only two : Elected, Not screened (= BSP2 case), or Not recommended.
See https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/this-is-not-a-recommended-extension-make-sure-you-trust-it-before-installing/49059
The way it is currently set, it merges the last 2 values together, and so puts in the same bag everything ... and people have no way to make sure they trust an extension without reviewing themselves the add-on source code (see https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2) ... I am not sure everybody can do that ...
2. 'Access your data for all websites'
See https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/wiki/Permissions-and-Privacy-policy for an explanation.
As soon as https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1315616 is provided, BSP2 will be able to drop that permission.
Note that if you are concerned with BSP2 accessing web sites to retrieve the favicons, you can disable that in its Options page. The drawback is that you lose the favicons (= little icons for each URL) in the bookmark tree.
I could try to implement a mechanism for that option to be optional and ask for it in a popup window, but this is a lot of code for a Firefox limitation which shouldn't be there (Chrome doesn't have that limitation), and which I hope will disappear by fixing the bug, so temporary situation. See https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/issues/91
Meanwhile, I fully sympathize with what you expose, being myself a bit paranoid on the Internet :-). And you are not the only one concerned, I saw a few others concerned by this before also. This is why I documented in details for each permission why BSP2 is needing it (again -> https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/wiki/Permissions-and-Privacy-policy)
I hope this helps. Thanks, aaFn.
There are really 2 points:
1. Statement at top of the extension's home page.
This is Mozilla's approach, and yes I believe that even than if gentler than initially conceived by them, it would be more factual and generating less anxiety if it could have 3 values instead of only two : Elected, Not screened (= BSP2 case), or Not recommended.
See https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/this-is-not-a-recommended-extension-make-sure-you-trust-it-before-installing/49059
The way it is currently set, it merges the last 2 values together, and so puts in the same bag everything ... and people have no way to make sure they trust an extension without reviewing themselves the add-on source code (see https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2) ... I am not sure everybody can do that ...
2. 'Access your data for all websites'
See https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/wiki/Permissions-and-Privacy-policy for an explanation.
As soon as https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1315616 is provided, BSP2 will be able to drop that permission.
Note that if you are concerned with BSP2 accessing web sites to retrieve the favicons, you can disable that in its Options page. The drawback is that you lose the favicons (= little icons for each URL) in the bookmark tree.
I could try to implement a mechanism for that option to be optional and ask for it in a popup window, but this is a lot of code for a Firefox limitation which shouldn't be there (Chrome doesn't have that limitation), and which I hope will disappear by fixing the bug, so temporary situation. See https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/issues/91
Meanwhile, I fully sympathize with what you expose, being myself a bit paranoid on the Internet :-). And you are not the only one concerned, I saw a few others concerned by this before also. This is why I documented in details for each permission why BSP2 is needing it (again -> https://github.com/aaFn/Bookmark-search-plus-2/wiki/Permissions-and-Privacy-policy)
I hope this helps. Thanks, aaFn.