151–160 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminder of the thing it's being compared to: > The containers feature is enabled in Firefox Nightly 50 by default with the about:config pref `privacy.userContext.enabled` set to true. Grandma and Joe SixPack aren't running Firefox Nightly with about:config tweaks either.
To be fair, grandma and joe sixpack don't even know firefox exists.
This is a neat idea but it doesn't implement the main reason I use separate profiles in Chromium - different security contexts based on how much you trust a site. Example: my main general browsing profile has flash, PDFs and all plugins disabled, absolutely all handlers switched off, all hardware access off, WebGL switched off, no account logins and uBlock Origin set to aggressively block most third-party requests. M…
I want to take it all the way to eleven and 'jail' a gui process (in this case, the web browser - any web browser). It gets its own filesystem root and its own IP BUT I don't have to pay the penalties of firing up a full blown virtual machine.
This isn't easy to do in the way that, for instance, jailing a daemon is easy to do ...
Further, even if I did have a workable recipe to jail a chrome process (and all of it's children) it would certainly only be for X. Maybe there's some recipe for that in OSX but it would be profoundly different. OSX doesn't even have the 'jail' command (although it does have chroot ...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox is integrating a cookie feature from Tor called first-party isolation or double-key cookies. It will separate third-party cookies for each first-party site, so evilcorp.org cookies for evilcorp.org images on a.org will not be set for evilcorp.org images on a.org. Blocking third-party cookies can break some site that rely on third-party resources, but first-party isolation should allow each site to work withou…
so evilcorp.org cookies for evilcorp.org images on a.org will not be set for evilcorp.org images on a.org I'm not sure this description is as clear as you intended.
... so evilcorp.org cookies for evilcorp.org images on A.org will not be set for evilcorp.org images on B.org.
Tech question: Does Firefox has technical process seperation of tabs nowdays? This is one of the main features of Chrome since 1.0 and just want to know if Firefox has something similar finally.
The foundational work is there, it's currently still going through testing, although you can already manually enable it and it works rather well, but as of right now it's not planned to have complete separation for each individual tab, as that just chews up a lot of resources with relatively little gain in performance. What's planned instead, is to use a set number of processes across all tabs. So, if this would be t…
Anyone know when this feature is planned to hit Beta or Stable ?
Do you mean officially considered beta/stable quality or just that it's there in the Beta or Stable version, so that you don't have to migrate to a less stable version of Firefox in order to use it? If it's the latter, there's two preferences that you can flip in about:config to enable it (even in Firefox Stable): privacy.userContext.enabled and privacy.userContext.ui.enabled Mind though that since this feature is cu…
Something like container windows, isolating different browser windows instead of tabs, might be a clear way to visibly show the separation to the user. In one window, they can log into their work Gmail. In another window they can log into their personal Gmail without any Google cookie confusion.
I'd like a container per Google account since trying to switch users in their apps is a disaster that forces me to run multiple browsers.
I'd also like to tie sites to specific containers. So supposing Banking stays its own category, that should mean that any sites that open in the Banking container will never open in another container. Similarly it should be possible to whitelist a set of sites for a container so e.g. only specific banking sites will launch in the Banking container.
Each container should have its own set of security permissions.
I'd like to have disposable containers. I want a safe space where I can open a sketchy link and not have to worry about that page doing anything to the rest of my environment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chrome has had it for a years, and it's a killer feature for many developers. It's very very useful to have multiple browser windows open, each logged into the same site as a different user. A lot of people do this by opening multiple browsers (FF, Chrome, Edge, Safari, etc) but that has its limits and it just adds another variable my poor brain would prefer not to handle. Firefox has had this since, well, forever; t…
Firefox profiles used to be more prominent/accessible. Then about 5 or so years back, Mozilla decided to dumb down the UI to better imitate Chrome. Now I think you have to actually launch Firefox from the command-line with special arguments to use profiles (or else install a third-party plugin to manage them).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has had multiple profiles for years too, though the UI isn't as nice as Chrome's. This is different, this is basically profiles that can sharethe same browser window.
I'm not sure I understand the benefit of being able to share the same browser window.