This site will have limited functionality while we undergo maintenance to improve your experience. If an article doesn't solve your issue and you want to ask a question, we have our support community waiting to help you at @FirefoxSupport on Twitter and/r/firefox on Reddit.

Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

Èròjà atẹ̀lélànà yii ni a ti fi pamọ́ fọ́jọ́ pípẹ́. Jọ̀wọ́ béèrè ìbéèrè titun bí o bá nílò ìrànwọ́.

How does a plugin become "known" by Firefox?

  • 4 àwọn èsì
  • 2 ní àwọn ìṣòro yìí
  • 7 views
  • Èsì tí ó kẹ́hìn lọ́wọ́ Jimvet100

more options

In the add-in plugin check page, there are several plugins listed as "Unknown". For instance, Microsoft Office 2013,15.0.4514.1000. What does this mean as far as my use of FF is concerned? And how do I get FF to "know" them?

In the add-in plugin check page, there are several plugins listed as "Unknown". For instance, Microsoft Office 2013,15.0.4514.1000. What does this mean as far as my use of FF is concerned? And how do I get FF to "know" them?

Ọ̀nà àbáyọ tí a yàn

That one shouldn't affect your use of Firefox or affect your security.

The Plugin Check was instituted mainly due to Adobe Flash and Sun/Oracle Java having so many reported security faults that "they" ignored for years, that when "they" started to fix them the rate of new versions got to the point of being every month or so it became more important to Mozilla to be able to alert their users about plugins that needed to be updated. So the Plugin Check system was instituted. QuickTime was a concern, too, along with other audio / video plugin programs; but of lesser importance as "they" weren't as "exploitable" or weren't being used for exploits or anywhere near as often.

As far as those that come up as "unknown", most are not considered a security issue. Although some (mostly made by Microsoft) like Silverlight aren't as readily identifiable thru the registry by Firefox; look at your "Installed Plugins" in the More system details... and you'll see 5.1.30214.0 - that is the Silverlight plugin. Not enough discoverable information for Firefox to ID it from the Registry and show it in Firefox, but the Plugin Check page does know what it is.

Ka ìdáhùn ni ìṣètò kíkà 👍 2

All Replies (4)

more options

Ọ̀nà àbáyọ Tí a Yàn

That one shouldn't affect your use of Firefox or affect your security.

The Plugin Check was instituted mainly due to Adobe Flash and Sun/Oracle Java having so many reported security faults that "they" ignored for years, that when "they" started to fix them the rate of new versions got to the point of being every month or so it became more important to Mozilla to be able to alert their users about plugins that needed to be updated. So the Plugin Check system was instituted. QuickTime was a concern, too, along with other audio / video plugin programs; but of lesser importance as "they" weren't as "exploitable" or weren't being used for exploits or anywhere near as often.

As far as those that come up as "unknown", most are not considered a security issue. Although some (mostly made by Microsoft) like Silverlight aren't as readily identifiable thru the registry by Firefox; look at your "Installed Plugins" in the More system details... and you'll see 5.1.30214.0 - that is the Silverlight plugin. Not enough discoverable information for Firefox to ID it from the Registry and show it in Firefox, but the Plugin Check page does know what it is.

more options

Only a few commonly used plugin are recognized the the plugin check website.

You can search this JavaScript file for mimeType: to see which plugins are supported (Highlight All makes it easier to spot them).

Among them are: Java, Shockwave Flash, Shockwave for Director, Windows Media Player, Silverlight, VLC, Adobe Reader, RealPlayer.

Ti ṣàtúnṣe nípa cor-el

more options

Thank you for your help; I think I now understand the situation. I have marked it "Solved". Onward.

more options

Thanks for the info. I consider it "solved".