Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Container Tabs

wiki.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 222 posts

Re: Container Tabs

#181

Post by eriknstr »

jhasse wrote: post #176
cpeterso wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oops! You are right. I meant: ... so evilcorp.org cookies for evilcorp.org images on A.org will not be set for evilcorp.org images on B.org .

Can you edit your post?

Probably not. HN only allows editing comments for a limited amount of time. In one post I found from a couple of years back, someone said that the edit window is two hours. I think perhaps also that as soon as someone has replied to a comment it will not be possible to edit that comment any longer but I'm not sure about that.

Re: Container Tabs

#182

Post by 0xffff2 »

alkonaut wrote: post #37
jakobegger wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is when site1.com is Twitter, and site2.com includes a Twitter button, then Twitter can see that you are browsing site2.com

Ok - I'm happy to break all such functionality by refusing the use of those cookies. I'm almost sure Ghostery already does this. Is there no legit/useful use for this (I don't count fb auth or like/tweet buttons)?

All you have to do to block this is disable third party cookies. I did this years ago and for my usage I've never even noticed.

Re: Container Tabs

#183

Post by driverdan »

hackuser wrote: post #165
cpeterso wrote: post #114

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…

I'm glad Firefox is doing this, but ... > Blocking third-party cookies can break some site that rely on third-party resources Can anyone name sites that require them? As someone who defaults to deny all cookies and manually enables every one my browser accepts, I don't think I've found a site that requires 3rd-party cookies. Few sites require cookies unless you login or have shopping cart. Of course, that's anecdotal…

I've been blocking 3rd party cookies for years. I think I've seen less than five sites break.

Re: Container Tabs

#184

Post by stymaar »

JohnBooty wrote: post #22

I am a Mozilla supporter and FF is my "daily driver" browser. Very interested in this feature. 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…

> Chrome has had it for a years

No, not really, not at all. Chromium has an equivalent (but more accessible and more user friendly) feature than Firefox profile, but it's nowhere close to this.

The profile feature in Firefox and Chromium allows you to have a different set of add-ons or browser configuration, but this feature is really different: it allows you, with the same features and add-ons, to have different sessions, with independent cookies to limit tracking and mitigate CSRF attacks.

Re: Container Tabs

#185

Post by hobarrera »

rlpb wrote: post #39

I would like to be able to configure my browser to open every URL in a domain-specific "container", unless I say otherwise. Say site www.a.org includes an image from www.evilcorp.org, and www.evilcorp.org sets a cookie. When I then go to www.b.org and it includes an image from www.evilcorp.org, I don't expect the cookie to be sent back. In other words, the cookie should be tied to www.a.org, even though it actually c…

Self destructing cookies (Firefox plugin) is probably the closes you can get to that nowadays. Not really the same, but the end result is really similar.

Re: Container Tabs

#186

Post by _andromeda_ »

This is really good. I might actually find myself using FF more now. Chrome supports multiple profiles but it's quite tedious make the switch(you'd need to create multiple accounts). The best solution that I'd been using was opening an incognito session, regular session, guest session(easier than having multiple profiles but hardly sufficient when you want many more separate sessions).

Edit: I love the color coding feature that distinguishes the distinct containers you have open.

Re: Container Tabs

#187

Post by jlgaddis »

sydd wrote: post #135
JohnBooty wrote: post #22

I am a Mozilla supporter and FF is my "daily driver" browser. Very interested in this feature. 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…

totally agree with the naming, 'container tabs' is bad. Also I dont like the separation, like having one for banking and one for personal stuff. Arent they the same? I'd have the following: personal: For personal banking, gmail, facebook, etc. very high security except on my trusted sites. Work: Work stuff. high security. Browsing: normal security, so everything works. wild west: No history, high security. Like priva…

Personally, I don't care for their choice of names. Hopefully the browser will allow an arbitrary number of containers and customization of their names.

Re: Container Tabs

#188

Post by ukyrgf »

hackuser wrote: post #165
cpeterso wrote: post #114

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…

I'm glad Firefox is doing this, but ... > Blocking third-party cookies can break some site that rely on third-party resources Can anyone name sites that require them? As someone who defaults to deny all cookies and manually enables every one my browser accepts, I don't think I've found a site that requires 3rd-party cookies. Few sites require cookies unless you login or have shopping cart. Of course, that's anecdotal…

hbogo.com relies on third party cookies from my cable company.

Re: Container Tabs

#189

Post by gcb0 »

hackuser wrote: post #166
gcb0 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

best thing that happened to mozilla was losing the money from google. yahoo pays them almost the same and does not meddle on anti tracking features. note how every single privacy feature came after google-money. during google-money what did we got? third party cookies accepted as default. good riddance, google.

Could you provide some examples? That's a serious allegation. I remember, as a volunteer, debating some privacy issue with a Google dev in Bugzilla. They made some crack about looking a gift horse in the mouth, but the discussion was out in the open. I don't recall evidence that Google was influencing Firefox improperly, but OTOH absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ...

I doubt people on the trenches were blatantly in on it. But I gave my views on the outcome. Investigate that and see the pattern.

Re: Container Tabs

#190

Post by gcb0 »

sametmax wrote: post #137
gcb0 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are using the wrong tool. install NoScript in firefox and allow flash/etc per domain temporarily or permanently. profiles/context tab is all about tracking. You just happen to successfully abuse one tool to your ends in one case.

NoScript is a pain to use and configure. And you need to finely tune it. With this profile method, you can have a "all-in" profile, and a "safe" one. This makes things much easier to manager.

1. install it. and close the annoying tab.

2. visit a site, click the noscript icon

3. allow the domains you trust.

no step 4.

how is this hard?

you only have to click the icon again if some site is not working.

Post reply on HN