Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
benatkin
jraph
A big thing for me is that Tampermonkey is not open source.
And yes, Firefox on Android has an allowlist of "known working good" extensions, the reason given being that Firefox for Android doesn't implement everything the Desktop version implements and IIUC, want to a avoid users blaming the browser when something breaks because of it.
xPaw
It really is bizzare, old Firefox used to support all addons, then they shipped a new version and only allowed like 10 addons, and to this day they don't allow any more. It's already been years.
I know my addon works fine on mobile, but they provide no means of specifying that*. I tried to email them for it to become "recommended" but never heard back.
The fact that they allow tampermonkey which allows any kind of script just adds insult to the injury.
* when uploading a new version, it does ask to specify which Firefox desktop/android versions are supported, but this existed before the new Firefox and doesn't do anything.
Laaas
Mozilla has been going down a bizarre path for a while. If only Brendan Eich could have stayed at Mozilla instead of getting excommunicated, then we'd have the best of Brave and Firefox.
(What _really_ showed me Mozilla is going crazy is when they fired sunfishcode (IIRC) and the Servo team! Both were essential to their success. It makes little sense.)
drtgh
I remember that update, suddenly they disabled Cookie AutoDelete, what left me with a bad feeling.
PS: Meanwhile I do not understand why is Ghostery included in that tinny allowed addons list (and now Tampermonkey).
moralestapia
Unfortunately, everything at Firefox has become political in nature and it's been downhill ever since.
With an already low (and diminishing) market share, it's just a matter of time before Google cuts their search engine deal with them, then poof they're gone!
outadoc
> It really is bizzare, old Firefox used to support all addons
It never did though? In my recollection the old version had an Android-only extensions API, and only a few extensions ever supported it. At least now, in theory, any extension can run on Android, which is great.
jerryzh
You can enable in about:config and install all plugin with Firefox Nightly
MasterYoda
As far as I know you can install any addons you want, you just have to create your own collection. Those default addons you see are only Mozillas standard collection.
Even do I would like there were more addons to choose from as default I can understand Mozillas choice here. And that is that most addons are not design for android and they would not work or give a very bad UX. So for many non tech savvy standard users, that just would be frustrated and blame Firefox, this decision can make sense to select god and popular addons they know works well.
But it would be great if more addons could be added ofcourse, and that Mozilla could have some design guidelines for new addons that they should work for both desktop and mobile (where it make sense). And mark in the addon store which addons that are design for both. Or maybe have a simple setting in Firefox for android that is for advanced users, there they could add any addon, but first they have to check a box that they understand that the addon may not work correctly on a smartphone.
neop1x
I had to stop using Firefox mobile due to this (and removal of about:config). I switched to Kiwi browser and I have been using Violentmonkey for several years. It doesn't work perfectly but it has been good enough for me.
jkonline
The Mozilla blog recently covered some of this IIRC: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/extensions-addo...
LightHugger
Ah yes, an addon whitelist. How very community friendly of Mozilla...
And they wonder why their market share plummets the way it does, making such extremely user hostile decisions like that.
wkat4242
And also, why do they block loading XPI extensions on mobile :(
Synaesthesia
Playing devil's advocate here, don't they need to protect their users from nefarious add ons that could steal data?
Semaphor
Yeah, I remember before they removed all addons, they had over 20% market share on mobile. Those were the days.
ecef9-8c0f-4374
I know for sure I could enforce the use of my desktop addons by installing them manually. They were missing dialogs boxen and touch problems, but for the most part they worked and I was OK with the problems. Of course we can't have nice things and not even bad things. Personal freedom is overrated after all. At some point Mozilla invested time and money to take my freedom. This reminds me of the time of XPI and XUL, when I used to hack my own Addons together. Then they enforced addon-signing. Until this point you could disable it and switch to "developer mode". I hate Mozilla and guess they hate me.
saghm
> A big thing for me is that Tampermonkey is not open source.
How does that even work? I assumed that Firefox extensions were implemented in frontend web technologies (JavaScript, CSS, etc.)? Do they use WebAssembly or something, or is it just obfuscated to the point that trying to read it isn't worthwhile?
pmontra
Check the EULA at https://www.tampermonkey.net/eula.php
Excerpt from point 4
> 4. NON-ALLOWABLE USES OF TAMPERMONKEY
> You are strictly prohibited from, and agree that you will not, adapt, edit, change, modify, transform, publish, republish, distribute, or redistribute Tampermonkey or any elements, portions, or parts thereof, including without limitation, to any elements, portions, or parts of Tampermonkey software (in any form or media) without the Company’s prior written consent. [...]
can_center_divs
Website's source code is not open source, even though you can inspect it.
If you have a public repository with your code on GitHub, everyone can see the code. But they do not have the right to use the same code in a commercial manner, without you specifying a license for your code, that says they can.
2Gkashmiri
being in cleartext does not mean the code itself is "open source" or proprietary. the license defines that,
charles_f
The latter afaik, but also since they have analytics there's a backend bit you can't see
undefined
sp332
For Android, yeah, they have a short list of allowed addons. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?promoted=re... You can get past it if you're willing to run Nightly and jump through these hoops: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...
noirscape
It's worth pointing out that this isn't truly "getting past it". It's still locked to Mozilla's add-on store (preventing you from testing or manually loading extension bundles) and all you're really doing is switching the collection that Fenix loads the extensions from to one you control instead.
One of the bigger reasons to use Fennec instead (the old Firefox Android browser, still maintained as a community fork) for me has been the fact that you can also load in the XPI files yourself, which is needed for a few FOSS extensions that aren't submitted to the Firefox Add-On Store due to one reason or another.
2h
Hmm I use F-droid Fennec daily, and it has the same whitelist of available extensions as regular Firefox. I don't see how to add your own, unless you go through the hoops of enabling debug mode (described elsewhere in another comment)
asddubs
what's the difference between the old and new firefox android browser? is it a separate codebase? different UI?
benatkin
Hmm, well they've chosen a known bad one. What gives. :(
How is this ever cool, Mozilla?
https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/1545#iss...
justinclift
Reading further down that issue, it doesn't seem to be what it initially sounded like.
?
mook
I've landed on using the F-droid build instead of Nightly. That also allows custom extension collections, and I believe Mozilla's attitude was that they get more telemetry for Nightly as they consider that an opt-in somehow (or at least they did for the desktop app).
dewy
How do you install Firefox via F-droid? (I searched, but don't see it listed in my F-droid store directly.)
Do you use the FFupdater app?
plorg
You can do this in Beta now as well.
nfriedly
Iceraven supports Violentmonkey - https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser
(Iceraven is a fork of Firefox for Android with way more extensions enabled and several other annoyances fixed.)
I just installed it and then added https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/460206-hn-avatars - it works perfectly!
benatkin
Ooh, that's awesome!
Similar to Kiwi Browser with Chromium.
pwdisswordfishc
> Greasemonkey was the good one and then something happened with it and it was no longer the best choice. I'm not sure what.
?????
piyush_soni
IIRC, the developer initially resisted shifting to WebExtensions and then eventually (my assumption) half-heartedly did convert his extension to it, but in the meantime TamperMonkey developer got to it much sooner and worked hard for making it work equally well in both Chrome and Firefox. It is still not as feature rich as TamperMonkey and not even actively maintained anymore I think.
Fnoord
I just checked the addon in its settings. Yes, it has telemetry. No, it isn't enabled by default. Its opt-in. That's how I want such a feature implemented (e.g. Homebrew doesn't, it uses opt-out).
piyush_soni
What exactly is better in ViolentMonkey? Just want to know because I keep working with userscripts and after GreaseMonkey's collapse TamperMonkey has been my default userscript manager.
thrdbndndn
In term of usability: its JS injector mechanism is much faster than TM last time I checked. Not that it's a big deal for normal users, but I have a few huge global scripts that I can see very visible impact.
And it's more "cleaner" as that you can clearly see each scripts you loaded in devtool and debug them, but and I think TM is catching up in this regard.
Outside that, VM is totally open source, development seems to be much quicker (with the drawback of slightly less stability, I'd admit), devs are more responsive.
onurtag
I'll pinch in with Tampermonkey's upsides compared to Violentmonkey.
Tampermonkey supports @connect [1] which lets you take an action whenever a script connects to a domain that isn't listed in its meta fields. Tampermonkey also warns you whenever a script modifies its @include/@match/@connect fiels with an update.
[1]: https://www.tampermonkey.net/documentation.php?locale=en#met...
piyush_soni
Yes, I was waiting for someone to write about it, but no one else did. I can see such a vast API that TamperMonkey offers in comparison to the competition. I don't have an immediate use of that extended API, but can definitely see using them in future.
silverwind
I prefer ViolentMonkey's UI to Tampermonkey's, and it's open source and likely technically superior as others have mentioned.
capitainenemo
ViolentMonkey at least seemed to be the only one that worked in my Firefox with NoScript enabled on a site. And since I was occasionally writing script snippets to fix stupid uses of JS to unhide images/html, that was nice.
eipi10_hn
My browsing's habit is the same as yours, just a bit different is I use noscript-mode and write my own scripts to fix the sites using ublock alone (so I won't need 2 extensions for it).
It was a bit (nice) surprised for me to see many sites is really usable in noscript-mode.
blibble
no popup every few days asking for money
Mystery-Machine
TamperMonkey has a terrible embedded editor. It assumes 4 spaces formatting and some other shit that I don't like, but can't change. I'm also lazy to switch to something else. I just wish they would fix the editor.
iggldiggl
Oh the days when user scripts were simply files on your hard disk and could simply be directly edited (and e.g. also globally searched) by the text editor of your choice…
spiralx
What? I've been using it for years and that's not true, there's several settings to customise formatting. Have you tried selecting "Advanced" for Config Settings, maybe that's why you can't see those settings.
derjanb
Simply set "Config mode" to "Advanced" search for the "Editor" section and configure everything as needed.
fumeux_fume
Only a small subset of extensions are allowed on mobile. If you use the nightly version of the Firefox app there's an elaborate process you can go thru to allow access to all extensions.
aqfamnzc
I agree with most of your comment, but just a quick note that whether or not a service provides a privacy policy doesn't mean they necessarily do anything to protect users' privacy. (Mostly in the sense that if they did have one, that fact wouldn't mean much on its own.)
dkbrk
I don't understand why Mozilla artificially limits what addons can be used on android.
I've been using Tampermonkey on android for years, and it worked fine, just like other addons that don't happen to have yet been blessed so that users are granted the privilege of being able to choose to install them.
For reference, to work around mozilla's artificial restrictions, you have to use nightly. Once you activate the debug menu (about firefox > tap logo 5 times) there's the option to set a "custom add-on collection". You can make a custom collection on addons.mozilla.org using a firefox account. The two fields are the last two parts of the URL on your custom collection.
Not only is this very cumbersome (especially if you want to add another addon to your collection and have that propagate to your phone), but it's only available on nightly. And nightly has a nasty habit of breaking. It's not much fun when an update causes it to crash immediately on visiting certain websites; even worse when restarting causes it to try to load the tab that just caused it to crash.
So, it ends up in a dilemma: you can either have a browser that doesn't catastrophically break every few updates; or you can have the freedom to install whatever addons you like. But not both.
And that dilemma is entirely artificial and unnecessary. Mozilla could have a process of verifying that addons work correctly on android and warn if you try to install one that isn't so verified (like how Valve has "Deck Verified" but doesn't stop you installing anything you like). But that's not what they've done, and they don't show any sign of changing their minds.
hoppyhoppy2
Just FYI you can now use a custom addon collection on Firefox Beta for Android, if you want to use a slightly less cutting-edge version. Fennec from F-Droid is another option.
2h
F-droid Fennec has the same whitelist of available extensions as regular Firefox
zeta0134
Yes, but it supports the custom addon collection feature. This way you can use it in a browser that isn't based on the beta/nightly branches, and should be less crashy. I run Fennec to access a few privacy redirect extensions, largely to make reddit and twitter less awful to browse without their respective apps.
Manfred
It would be good if they explained this in their documentation. But I think you summed it up in your own message:
> […] you can either have a browser that doesn't catastrophically break every few updates; or you can have the freedom to install whatever addons you like […]
I think they don't want malicious and abandoned extensions to taint the Firefox experience. Users will only see "Firefox is broken" and not realize that it's caused by the extensions they installed.
Zak
Then why isn't desktop Firefox constantly broken?
In the days of XUL extensions, it was for users who installed a lot of extensions, but that hasn't been a problem for s long time.
esperent
I've been using Kiwi browser on Android for years. It supports like 80% of chrome extensions, never breaks on updates. The only major issue is that extension settings pages are rarely optimized for mobile.
So I think this excuse is BS to be honest.
anonymousab
They could trivially bury full add-on market access under 5 scary models and a password or something, but instead they use an absurdly cumbersome mechanism.
Zak
It seems like there should be four levels:
Recommended extensions, those that are currently available are vetted by Mozilla staff, not only for safety, but for utility and alignment with Mozilla's goals. These require no warnings or disclaimers.
Community approved extensions would be on AMO and approved by staff-selected community members for safety and policy compliance. No warnings, but a link/checkbox/toggle at the bottom of the extensions page.
All of AMO - this should need a toggle to turn on, and a warning that extensions have not been tested and could be unstable or malicious with a second checkbox to acknowledge.
Local install - this should be buried in the settings and called something like "I am an extension developer". Turning it on should pop up an additional warning about other peoples' code being dangerous. Actually installing an extension should require separate use of a file manager or command line, and then enabling it inside the Firefox UI.
The current approach reminds me of Apple's app store, except it's much harder to get on the recommended list than to get an iOS app approved.
All of which is why I use Kiwi Browser.
OkayPhysicist
There are only like 15 of us using Firefox mobile. It is safe to say that if you are using Firefox mobile, you are technically savvy enough to go "Ah, I installed some extensions and now Firefox crashes a lot".
Let extensions claim whether they work on mobile or not, and open the flood gates.
razor_router
I find it very concerning that Mozilla has such an artificial limit on what addons can be used on Android. Do you know why they have set up such a limit?
proc_guts_fan
If anyone needs a "monkey" not for web pages but for any process on your computer system, may I recommend Frida:
https://github.com/frida/frida
With Frida, you write JavaScript programs and then inject them into arbitrary processes, to hook and modify and call whatever you please.
It gets a lot of use in the reverse engineering and vulnerability research communities, but has broader scope too.
For instance, I used it recently to automate the UI of a video production program on Windows, by sending window messages to the main message loop from an injected thread, and hooking into various system dialog functions to override them.
alin23
Second that, I love Frida! I recently wrote about how I used it to reverse engineer the MacBook’s clamshell mode, and add it in Lunar (https://lunar.fyi)
There’s a few extra steps in allowing Frida to work on macOS so leaving that here in case others might be interested in how to do it: https://alinpanaitiu.com/blog/turn-off-macbook-display-clams...
2Gkashmiri
is this a fancy pants cheat engine?
underdeserver
It is, for rather exotic meanings of "cheat".
pugworthy
I love the entire *Monkey family. I've been able to prototype so many, "And this is what our website could do if we..." things at work using it, plus create custom filters for selected online forums, etc.
My favorite at the moment is one that can strip out long signatures from posts on mgexp.com, as well as let me selectively block/hide some threads.
Also, not *Monkey script, but still running the custom HN avatar per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30668137
nfriedly
It's too late to add comments to the original thread, but I put together a variation that incorporates all of the suggestions from the comments, plus a couple of tweaks of my own (run on all HN pages, add an avatar to your username in the top bar) and made it available here: https://github.com/nfriedly/hn-avatars/
mg
Personally, I prefer bookmarklets over extensions and Tampermonkey.
They work the same on Desktop, Android and iOS. So I can write my bookmarklet once and use it everywhere. Without installing anything. I also like that bookmarklets only kick in when you click on them. Although some might find that too much work, it feels natural to me. It is already in my muscle memory, to click an "Increase Fontsize" bookmarklet when I start to read through a thread on Hacker News on a mobile device, for example.
sp332
Wait, how do you use a bookmarklet like that on mobile Firefox? I have two that do this:
https://web.archive.org/web/submit?url=%s
javascript:void(location.href='http://web.archive.org/save/'+document.location.href)
But neither of them work on mobile because it opens a new tab first before evaluating the bookmarklet.
pwg
For the few I have on FF Android, create the bookmarklet as normal, give it a name, and also give it a "keyword" string.
Then, when you want to execute a bookmarklet on the current page, pull down to get to the URL bar (if it is hidden) and start typing the "keyword" string into the url bar. After a few characters the "suggestions" list should show the bookmarklet entry, when it does, tap on the entry and the bookmarklet will execute on the current page.
I've not been able to find a way to "open" a list of bookmarklets to pick from, other than using keyword search via the URL bar, so this does also require remembering the "keywords" for each to be able to access them.
sp332
That doesn't work for me at all. If I type the keyword, it doesn't show up in the URL suggestions. And it doesn't activate when I push go.
But mg also says that it works, so I wonder what's wrong with mine.
mg
Is that void(...code...) syntax a good way to execute bookmarks? Also, your code is not urlencoded?
I use javascript:(function(){...code...})() and urlencode the whole thing.
I maintain this bookmarklet editor to easily convert code to bookmarklets:
sp332
It's been sitting around a long time and I don't remember where I got it from. Thanks for the link though.
ckcheng
Thanks! Unfortunately, bookmarklets just doesn't seem to work on iOS... :( I tried using your bookmarklet editor to see if it helped, and the resulting bookmarklets didn't work in iOS Safari nor iOS Firefox.
oh well... Wish I had found your bookmarklet editor when I was trying to use them on Android before!
cookie_monsta
Nice! Bookmarked :)
piyush_soni
The benefit you say that bookmarklets have is in fact also the biggest drawback of bookmarklets as well - that you have to manually click on them - and you can't press that button in a loop like a script can do :). Personally for me userscripts are great - as instead of using tens of extensions I use one userscript manager and write many of these scripts myself - so the trust factor is always there.
jhvkjhk
Do bookmarklets still work on iOS? I wanted to try them but I found this post:
> Apple no longer allows running JavaScript in either the Mobile Safari address bar or as a mobile Safari bookmark.
pmoleri
Thanks, I had forgotten this even existed. I was looking for something like this to perform unit conversions on a website.
Edit: And without giving excessive permissions to an extension.
nfriedly
This is a good thing, but it feels like Mozilla is putting a Band-Aid over the huge gaping wound they cut in Firefox for Android when they disabled nearly all the extensions.
danuker
My guess is they are afraid they might lose Google money if they enable too much freedom.
But they have also been losing users, and without users they have no leverage.
jeroenhd
I use some addons that weren't whitelisted trough the addon collection trick.
Many addons plain don't work. The mobile browser doesn't have the UI these addons rely on and maybe there's some API coverage missing.
I considered this a fair reason when the rewrite was released, you could still use the old Firefox for a while. But then time passed and nothing changed.
It's clear the Fenix devs don't have the capacity or the interest to maintain addon support.
There are many silly things about the browser rewrite. For instance, you can't enter an IPv6 address and navigate to it (i.e. http://[::1]/). Firefox will always Google it. You can click a link from another app and the page will load just fine, but the address bar just doesn't understand those addresses. Then there's the fact about:config is disabled in stable versions of Firefox. Or the fact that enabling user-installed certificate authorities requires you to go into debug settings.
I don't think Mozilla has a clear idea what it wants with their browser, it feels so unfinished in so many ways.
iggldiggl
> Many addons plain don't work. The mobile browser doesn't have the UI these addons rely on and maybe there's some API coverage missing.
Even the old Fennec code base never fully supported all bits of the Webextension API, and yet there were no restrictions on add-on installation. Besides in any case it would have been up to add-on developers to decide whether they could sensibly get their add-on to work on Android (and therefore mark it as officially compatible with Android on AMO), or whether some crucial API was missing (or they simply didn't feel like re-designing the UI with small screens in mind) and therefore leave it as officially desktop-only.
Simple page scripts don't require any APIs (and especially no UI!) beyond basic Webextension support at all, and yet e.g. the video-background-play-fix add-on was only whitelisted after comparatively ages and much user complaining.
And even before Webextensions, when writing an Android add-on required quite a bit more separate code that couldn't directly be re-used from a desktop add-on (due to the UI and e.g. tab management being handled differently between Desktop Firefox and Fennec), AMO still had much more Android add-ons available than the current measly 22 add-ons that can officially be installed.
Zak
There's no incentive for addon developers to fix the experience because only a tiny fraction of Firefox users will jump through the hoops to run them. It seems to me like Mozilla is actively trying to prevent there from being an addon ecosystem for the mobile version, and I do not understand their motivation.
friend_and_foe
Iceraven has had this capability forever, no big announcement required.
If you want to use Firefox on android and don't want to deal with these artificial restrictions and excuses for bad behavior just get iceraven and call it a day.
2h
IceRaven only allows from this list:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/1620123...
so if you wrote yourself, too bad
nfriedly
Plus one for Iceraven - https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser
And an additional shout out for FF Updater, which can keep Iceraven up to date - https://github.com/Tobi823/ffupdater
jerrygoyal
I'm using iceraven for months. only issue is i don't get regular version updates
18571857
What's the difference between Iceraven and Fennec?
nelblu
https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser
"Note that Iceraven Browser includes some unstable code written by Mozilla, with our own added modifications on top, all shipped with the stable version of GeckoView engine."
I wouldn't use iceraven if security was a priority.
Fennec on the other hand is much closer to FF , quoting their page :
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.mozilla.fennec_fdroid/
"Fennec F-Droid is based on the latest Firefox release (codenamed Fenix).
It has proprietary bits and telemetry removed, but still connects to
various Mozilla and Google services that can track users."
ojosilva
Iceraven is FF for Android, with tracking and telemetry removed, some redesigned features (ie tiles) and about:config, and mostly an attempt at supporting desktop add-ons which were removed when Fenix/GeckoView came to life in 2019.
Stability and security is not a priority though. Updates are slow.
I use it primarily for compatibility with my favorite add-ons not available on FF Android: I don't care about cookies, Cookie AutoDelete, Translate Web Pages, etc.
Mull is another FF Android fork may be worth taking a look at.
2h
If this post title sounds weird to you, it should.
Since Android Firefox 68, you cannot install custom extensions, unless you register on AMO. Even if you wrote the extension yourself.
remram
Did they change their mind? I can't find it in the addons site (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?promoted=re...), and it is not listed in the linked blog post (https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/these-3-new-firefox-andr...)
The "Add to Firefox" button on this page is disabled for me: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tampermonkey/
I am on 110.0.1 from Google Play.
Epskampie
Awesome but i really really want "I don't care about cookies". Please please let us have it (without having to jump through strange hoops)
fisian
You can block many websites cookie banners by using ublock origin and enable some of the Annoyances filter lists in the settings.
I use the "AdGuard annoyances" and "easylist cookie" lists and that blocks many cookie banners.
Also, "I don't care about cookies" was recently bought by a company, which could mean bad things for the extension in the future.
SlackingOff123
Do you still want to use it was took over by Avast?
https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/whats-new/acquisiti...
ntp85
The extension has fortunately been forked: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcar...
SlackingOff123
I wasn't aware of that. Thank you!
weberer
Doesn't Firefox for Android already support uBlock? If so, you can just enable the Easylist Cookie filter, which is disabled by default for whatever reason.
DangitBobby
It's not perfect but uBlock Origin has some annoyances lists that help with cookie nags.
bkor
A nicer one is Consent-O-Magic
xdfgh1112
Get Fdroid and install Fennec, it can do any Firefox extension iirc.
sphars
Hmm I use F-droid Fennec daily, and it has the same whitelist of available extensions as regular Firefox. I don't see how to add your own, unless you go through the hoops of enabling debug mode (described elsewhere in another comment)
friend_and_foe
Just get iceraven.
remram
Who is behind Iceraven? I feel uneasy using such a critical component from unknown Internet randos.
friend_and_foe
Do you know the name of the guy that pushes the FF updates? What is is about a corporate structure that makes it more reputable? If I told you that 99% of iceraven code was produced at Mozilla would that make it better?
Everyone in the world is an unknown internet rando.
coconut08
it would be nice if it could support all extensions like kiwi browser does for chromium on android.
Springtime
From what I've read Firefox for Android Nightly doesn't restrict which addons are allowed to be installed[1] but does require a really byzantine method to get them installed, by first creating a Mozilla account, creating a collection of addons, then using the collection URL to install them.
It's unfortunate that both being able to install any addon and access about:config on mobile isn't just some checkbox away or at least more accessible without having to install Nightly. A few years ago both were available in the regular version.
One alternative is the F-Droid Fennec fork, which is said to enable both out of the box[2].
[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...
[2] https://reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/wu4g0s/mozilla_firefox...
pmontra
It's so byzantine that I was never able to make it work. I attempted twice, probably making the same mistake both times.
pieter_mj
I was unable to access my addon collection when using underscores in the collection name, hth.
muxator
I am on Fennec f-droid.
About:config is there, but the absurd whitelist on extensions is still there. I cannot confirm what the reddit thread says.
tommica
Userscripts are such an amazing thing
IronWolve
Just make sure you read every script and don't auto update. Back in the day, some changed to take over your facebook.
keithnz
I just use it for my own scripts. It's great for when you don't like something and think it should be done slightly different. I also re-layout news sites as they are mostly just horrendous.
tommica
That's a good tip - I need to check that it's not auto updating scripts.
cookie_monsta
I would never use somebody else's userscript - that just seems like asking for trouble
medstrom
You're using others' scripts from the firmware up all the way to the lite comment input box on HN, and you have just as much reason to trust any piece of that gigantic stack as you do a *Monkey script.
Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
Greasemonkey was the good one and then something happened with it and it was no longer the best choice. I'm not sure what.
The same repeated with Tampermonkey. It now has telemetry built into it, at one time w/ no privacy policy.
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/6hs59w/tampermonke...
The good one now is Violentmonkey. Has been for some time.
Does Mozilla have an allowlist for these? If so I don't like it.