The developer claims that Mozilla changed the labeling system, but I have a lot of extensions installed, and none of them asked for additional permissions to collect my data. Why do I smell bs?
If you are a scammer, say: "Thanks for taking the time to leave a review.
RYD hasn’t changed how it handles your data. What changed is how Mozilla labels these permissions - not what the extension does with your data."

New permission requirements make this an automatic hard pass - recommendation should be revoked.

Edit in response to the developer:

I think you're missing the point.

The issue isn't that Mozilla suddenly gave RYD access to the whole internet. It's that Mozilla has now made explicit data collection that was apparently already happening, but wasn't previously disclosed.

And "anonymous user ID" doesn't really solve that. It's a persistent identifier tied to YouTube activity. That's pseudonymous, not meaningfully anonymous.

More importantly, the extension being open source only tells us what gets sent. The RYD backend is still a black box. Once that data leaves the browser, we're being asked to trust RYD not to retain, correlate, profile, monetize, or sell it — particularly after we've learned the collection was previously undeclared.

The fact that the data is useful to RYD doesn't mean it's necessary for the extension's basic advertised function. Showing a dislike count doesn't inherently require building a persistent record of users' YouTube activity.

And the Chrome and Firefox stores don't even have identical data-collection declarations, so "Mozilla just changed the labels" doesn't really explain everything away.

That's why I find the response a bit tone deaf. The concern isn't "OMG, RYD can now read every website." It's "why does a simple dislike-count extension need to collect this much information about my YouTube activity, and why was that collection not clearly disclosed before?"


Edit 2:

The vote/registration pipeline isn't anonymous — it's pseudonymous and persistent, and your own code and privacy policy confirm it:

1) Persistent identifier: generateUserId() creates a unique 36-character ID at registration, which createBrowserCredentialStore() persists in browser.storage.sync. It isn't rotated per session or video.

2) Persistent correlation: performVote() sends { userId, videoId, value } to /interact/vote and /interact/confirmVote. Reusing the same identifier lets your backend associate votes and video activity with the same user over time. That's pseudonymization, not anonymization.

3) Additional identifiers: Your privacy policy says IP address and request time are also collected. Those can further associate the persistent identifier with a real-world network connection.

4) Your own policy treats the identifier as personal data. So describing it to users simply as an "anonymous" ID is misleading. Randomly generated does not mean anonymous when the value is persistent and specifically used to correlate records.

The appropriate description is pseudonymous, persistent user identification, not anonymous collection.

Das ist nicht mehr die ursprüngliche Erweiterung. Sie entwickelt sich in eine Richtung, die mir nicht gefällt. Habe kein gutes Gefühl. Wird deinstalliert!

spyware, dont download if you value your privacy

Don't install! It's an adware/spyware!!!

why suddenly does this need..:

Browsing activity
Personally identifying information
Website activity
Website content

Thats a bit much..
It only needs to activate when i open youtube and give me the button....

A spyware

The add-on no longer works in private windows, so it is completely useless to me.

Removed this extension when out of nowhere it tried forcing me to agree to invasive data collection. There is no need for this.

They will collect your personal data and your internet activity. Pure telemetry. Delete this freemium extension!

it was a good extension until now ... now it begs for money for advanced features, the only thing it should do is showing me the dislikes and i dont need adavnced features, every developer turns at somepoint against the users ...

Erforderliche Datenerfassung nach Angaben des Entwicklers:

Surfaktivität
Personenbezogene Daten
Website-Aktivitäten
Website-Inhalt

Goodbye trojaner

nah bro why this thing tryna make me log in now?? it literally just show a number lol. new update saying it need my github/patreon login and "authentication" stuff, nah i'm good on that. premium popups been creepin in for a minute too fr. uninstalled, straight up.

Horrible update added spyware, locking things behind "premium", and is clearly LLM-gen-AI slop.

started begging for money after upgrade, massive red flag - DO NOT INSTALL

Started by showing an ad for paid features after a silent upgrade. I don't want my extensions showing ads. Instant removal.

collect more data ?
no thx. youtube usable without this data hungry app

The developer suddenly updated this app to add a bunch of analytics features that pop open around YouTube videos and beg you to pay the developer money for "premium" features. It now also collects data from your browser.

Return YouTube Dislike is a privacy‑overreaching, intrusive, and increasingly untrustworthy extension. The recent update demanding broad data‑collection permissions is unacceptable, and the developer’s decisions make this add‑on something we cannot recommend to anyone.

The new permissions - and why they’re a problem
Firefox’s updated privacy labels reveal the true scope of what the extension can access:

Browsing activity - It can monitor when you navigate between videos.

Website content - It can read elements on YouTube pages.

Personally identifiable information - It uses a private user ID tied to your activity, even if “randomly generated.”

Online/activity data - It tracks likes/dislikes and viewing behavior.

The developer insists this is limited to YouTube and the extension’s own site, but the permission categories themselves are broad, and users must trust that the extension never expands its scope. Trust is earned and this project has repeatedly damaged that trust.

Why you should not use it
It requires powerful permissions that allow reading and modifying data on YouTube a major privacy risk for an extension maintained by a single developer.

It has already introduced intrusive pop‑ups, which many users mistook for malware.

Firefox’s new labels expose how much data it touches, and even if anonymized, the extension still collects and sends user interaction data to its servers.

Backend code is not fully open‑source, meaning users cannot audit what happens to their data once it leaves their browser.

Why YouTube itself must retain control over dislikes?

The public display of dislikes is not just a cosmetic feature. It affects:

Creator safety

Anti‑harassment mechanisms

Algorithmic fairness

Abuse prevention

External extensions that artificially restore this function bypass protection mechanisms that we intentionally implemented to shield creators from targeted dislike campaigns.

Only the platform itself can ensure that interaction data is handled responsibly, transparently, and in accordance with privacy and security guidelines.

The Google Team

New permissions are horrible, personal information?