Can somebody please explain to me the purpose of this change. I read the blog post explaining the decision[0]. The crux of the argument was<p>&gt;many tens of millions of users have non-hosted add-ons that were installed without their informed consent&quot;<p>Why go thermonuclear and require add-on signing for everyone? Why not just make the add-on installation screen a little bit scarier. And if the concern is to make sure that people are installing what they think they&#x27;re installing (i.e not something served by a man in the middle), then maybe just require that add-ons be downloaded from a site with HTTPS.<p>I just really don&#x27;t see the point in this extreme choice.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.mozilla.org&#x2F;addons&#x2F;2015&#x2F;04&#x2F;15&#x2F;the-case-for-extension-signing&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.mozilla.org&#x2F;addons&#x2F;2015&#x2F;04&#x2F;15&#x2F;the-case-for-exte...</a>