/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Mozilla says its WebExtensions API (Manifest) v3 updates in Firefox won't follow Google's implementation that hindered ad blockers

Like Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi, Mozilla distances itself from Google's planned extensions update that is anticipated to hinder ad blockers in Chrome.

ZDNet Catalin Cimpanu

Context & Ripple Effects

Google set the stage in May when it said Chrome's current ad-blocking capabilities would be restricted to enterprise users under its planned extensions overhaul, despite negative feedback (restricting Chrome ad blocking to enterprise). Mozilla's announcement is the first explicit refusal by a major non-Chromium vendor to copy that implementation into Firefox's version of the WebExtensions API.

The stakes come from the shared standard: WebExtensions was meant to let one codebase run across browsers, so Google's Manifest v3 choices were on track to become de facto rules for everyone. With Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi also distancing themselves, and the EFF later arguing the rules hurt innovation without stopping malware (EFF's critique of Manifest V3), this is the moment the 'one extensions platform' assumption starts to crack.

First-order effects

  • Ad blocker developers can keep building full-strength blockers for Firefox using the APIs Google plans to restrict, making Firefox the default target for extensions whose Chrome versions will be degraded.

Second-order effects

  • Extension developers now face maintaining divergent codebases — one for Google's Manifest v3 and one for Mozilla's — raising costs and pushing smaller blockers toward whichever browser offers the larger capable audience.

Third-order effects

  • If the split holds, the WebExtensions standard effectively forks into a Google-controlled Chromium variant and a Mozilla variant, turning extension API governance into a competitive differentiator rather than a shared baseline — a divergence later visible in how widely ad-blocker capabilities differ across browsers (growing ad blocker disparities) and in non-Google browsers' joint refusal to adopt FLoC.

The trend: Browser vendors are splitting from Google's ad-driven platform decisions — Manifest v3 here, FLoC elsewhere — with privacy-preserving extension support becoming the main axis of differentiation for Firefox, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi.

Discussion

  • @piro_or Piro on x
    Mozilla's Manifest v3 FAQ | Mozilla Add-ons Blog https://blog.mozilla.org/... At this article Mozilla says that there is no *immediate* plan to remove v2 compatible blocking API, and Firefox will keep v2 compatible APIs until a migration path for addons to v3 APIs is prepared.
  • @campuscodi Catalin Cimpanu on x
    Good news: Mozilla doesn't plan to support the WebExtension API changes that Google announced for Chrome This means ad blockers will continue to work as normal in Firefox https://www.zdnet.com/... https://twitter.com/...
  • @mozamo @mozamo on x
    A number of developers have reached out to ask how Mozilla plans to respond to Google's proposed changes to their extensions API (Manifest v3). Check out our blog for answers to some frequently asked questions: https://blog.mozilla.org/...
  • @simoahava Simo Ahava on x
    Remember that ETP blocks *third-party tracking cookies* by default. Thus the first-party analytics cookies used by e.g. Google Analytics, Adobe, etc. are not impacted. However, if GA tried to write a cookie on http://www.google-analytics.com/ when on your domain, that WOULD be bl…
  • @can Can Duruk on x
    Firefox joins the party, blocking third-party cookies by default. Pretty clear, the way wind blows. https://blog.mozilla.org/...
  • @geoffreyfowler Geoffrey A. Fowler on x
    Starting today, Mozilla's Firefox browser blocks all third-party tracking cookies for everyone, not just new installations: https://blog.mozilla.org/... Google's Chrome by default blocks 0.
  • @epro Emil Protalinski on x
    .@Firefox 69 is out - Third-party tracking cookies and cryptomining blocked by default - Fingerprinting blocked under the Strict setting - Performance improvements on Windows 10 - Better battery life on macOS - Flash must be turned on manually every time https://venturebeat.com/.…