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

Site Isolation in Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 118 posts

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#71

Post by Dylan16807 »

lxgr wrote: post #66
Dylan16807 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if "most conditions" is even true. Even when it's only running a handful of processes and I have plenty of ram free I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs.

I think there are some restrictions on tab "navigation source". (Something about a fairly obscure JavaScript feature that links tabs opened via click navigation, if I recall correctly.) Does this also happen when you type the Twitch URL in a new tab?

Yes. Or even if I have another tab on youtube or whatever and type in twitch, it will close the youtube process and switch to sharing the existing twitch process.

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#72

Post by staticassertion »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #47
JonathonW wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome's policy is pretty much the same; while it can generate a process-per-tab under most conditions, the guarantee it actually makes (in modern versions of Chrome) is that sites (including different-origin iframes) are isolated into different processes. They use the PSL to determine which sites constitute a different origin, just like Firefox does.

I don't know if "most conditions" is even true. Even when it's only running a handful of processes and I have plenty of ram free I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs.

> I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs.

Do you actually want it to? Or are you just experimenting? FWIW There's a flag related to isolation in your chrome://flags that will do per-origin.

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#74

Post by Dylan16807 »

staticassertion wrote: post #72
Dylan16807 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if "most conditions" is even true. Even when it's only running a handful of processes and I have plenty of ram free I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs.

> I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs. Do you actually want it to? Or are you just experimenting? FWIW There's a flag related to isolation in your chrome://flags that will do per-origin.

The bug might be fixed right now but yes I definitely wanted it, because opening a twitch tab was consistently causing the video in the old tab to hang for a couple seconds.

> There's a flag related to isolation in your chrome://flags that will do per-origin.

What flag is that?

I even tried setting --process-per-site-instance and it had no effect.

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#75

Post by tialaramex »

mastazi wrote: post #69
yakubin wrote: post #6

This provides more technical details: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2021/05/introducing-firefox-new-si... >, which should be more interesting to HN than a marketing announcement. In particular, it seems that "site" isn't precisely defined. It seems to be based on domains, but backed by a human-curated list of "sites": https://github.com/publicsuffix/list >. So it's different than Chrome's "every webpage gets a separate p…

The public suffix list is also used by other browsers to determine whether resources are cross origin (see below), not just by Firefox. So, I think it's a pretty authoritative list, and also consider that domains are added by formal request of the domain holder, not as a result of someone's curation. That list is the reason why CORS behaves differently e.g. across two subdomains like [subdomain].herokuapp.com (reques…

One of the maintainers of the PSL (Ryan Sleevi) has written on HN before that they'd sure like it if people leant on the PSL less rather than more.

It's a nasty hack, the successor to even worse proprietary hacks but still something we ought to strive to get rid of.

I can see exactly why it was the choice here, and I don't blame Mozilla for choosing it, but we're not going to make things better if nobody gets out and pushes.

That said, since we're stuck with the PSL for the foreseeable, I sure would like it if Mozilla shipped a way for extensions to just consult Firefox's built-in copy of the PSL, rather than needing to either build yet another awful hack or ship the entire PSL again in an extension.

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#76

Post by staticassertion »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #74
staticassertion wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I cannot convince it to use more than one process for twitch tabs. Do you actually want it to? Or are you just experimenting? FWIW There's a flag related to isolation in your chrome://flags that will do per-origin.

The bug might be fixed right now but yes I definitely wanted it, because opening a twitch tab was consistently causing the video in the old tab to hang for a couple seconds. > There's a flag related to isolation in your chrome://flags that will do per-origin. What flag is that? I even tried setting --process-per-site-instance and it had no effect.

There's "--process-per-tab" and Strict-Origin-Isolation , dunno if that'll work though

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#77

Post by huntermeyer »

Does anyone else get ANNOYED by the UI of Mozilla's blog on mobile?

Looking at the navbar, the horizontal and vertical alignment is all over the place, the search input has no placeholder or label, background colors are inconsistent, and paddings are just bizarre.

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#78

Post by staticassertion »

nfoz wrote: post #24
oblio wrote: post #19

Software is hard. Chrome had this in 2008. Firefox had to be rearchitected 14 years for this.

Browsers are too big and the web is too complex. Engineering failures all around. As engineers, we should not accept this status quo; we should replace it. We need a new web and new software.

What's wrong with the web and browsers? It's honestly pretty incredible - we have a system where we can load and execute arbitrary code from any number of third parties near-instantly and it actually works and isn't a complete security disaster.

Seems pretty cool tbh

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#79

Post by OminousWeapons »

fragileone wrote: post #46
rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any idea? I'd love to drop https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... , which automatically assigns a temporary container to any new tab, which plays nicely with the https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account... but uses too much memory (at least from my experience).

Enable Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection setting, this turns on Dynamic First Party Isolation which is the native version of what Temporary Containers is aiming to do.

I believe this is privacy.firstparty.isolate in about:config, if you want to do this manually

Re: Site Isolation in Firefox

#80

Post by nextos »

ksml wrote: post #37

This is really interesting. Prior to this, Firefox's isolation model was much weaker than Chrome's due to only having a pool of 8 content processes. If I'm reading the technical blog correctly [1], this will move to a process-per-site model without also doing process-per-tab as Chrome does, i.e. if you have several tabs open on the same site, they'd be in the same process. This seems much less resource intensive than…

Complementary to this, one can use the Temporary Containers addon to get isolation of e.g. cookies. I've set it up to run one container per domain, and it works really well. I hope they merge this into Firefox at some point.
Post reply on HN