Firefox 21.0

Vulnerability fixes:
Fixed in Firefox 21
MFSA 2013-48 Memory corruption found using Address Sanitizer
MFSA 2013-47 Uninitialized functions in DOMSVGZoomEvent
MFSA 2013-46 Use-after-free with video and onresize event
MFSA 2013-45 Mozilla Updater fails to update some Windows Registry entries
MFSA 2013-44 Local privilege escalation through Mozilla Maintenance Service
MFSA 2013-43 File input control has access to full path
MFSA 2013-42 Privileged access for content level constructor
MFSA 2013-41 Miscellaneous memory safety hazards (rv:21.0 / rv:17.0.6)

https://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox.html

The privilege escalation through updating mechanisms seems a recurring vulnerability:
MFSA 2013-44 Local privilege escalation through Mozilla Maintenance Service
MFSA 2013-34 Privilege escalation through Mozilla Updater
MFSA 2013-32 Privilege escalation through Mozilla Maintenance Service
MFSA 2012-35 Privilege escalation through Mozilla Updater and Windows Updater Service

 

This is a classic case of "glass half empty, glass half full".

You see this as an "ever-improving" browser...constantly being kept on top of things.

I'm seeing it more as a very flawed browser that has to be upgraded constantly because of inferiority.

Like BoerenkoolMetWorst posted just above...that's a lot of "vulnerabilities" and flaws that are needing to be corrected. Especially considering v20 was just released a little over a month ago, and 20.01 was released literally less than a month ago.

Much like Microsoft has taken heat over the years for major service pack releases and constant OS updates causing people to say "if they'd build a better operating system they wouldn't need to constantly update it"....the same could be applied to Firefox. If it was a better browser to begin with, they wouldn't need to upgrade to a new version every month.

 

That's a valid point.

But I'm not sure that Mozilla has the resources to invest in SDL like Microsoft did.

And as long as these "late" discoveries of vulnerabilities don't affect users...

 

For those looking for firefox based browsers, there are many. The best ones are palemoon 32 and 64, waterfox 64, comodo icedragon 32. On my system the best one I found is palemoon 64. It is very smooth and fast and looks and is based on firefox 20 (thats what firefox extension site refers to palemoon). I never had freezing, flash crash or slowness and any other issues with it. Even with tons of extension, it is still fast and smooth.

 

Forget Waterfox. It's almost as good as dead. I'd say Palemoon and Cyberfox are far better projects.

Palemoon has been around for a long time and it even has its own forum. The developer MoonChild has also provided a tip to Alex (Waterfox dev) once.

Cyberfox is relatively new compared to the others but so far, the developer has been on the ball in regards to updates.

 

Release Notes for those that may want them:
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/21.0/releasenotes/

 

Does anyone else have a problem with Firefox hanging sometimes when flash is being rendered on a page/tab? I've had this issue with several builds now.

 

I don't have Flash on Firefox but I'm having similar issues with Chrome.

 

How many extensions do you use? I use 4-5 of the most popular ones and they are always updated. But on the other hand I do agree with you. FF should release only security updates and then once every 6 months roll out a bunch of new features. That would give everyone more time to keep up.

 

Do you have hardware acceleration enabled ?
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/09/hardware-acceleration/
Try flushing the *.sol LSO's.

 

I've wondered if it was Flash and not necessarily a Firefox issue.

I flush those pretty regularly, but I do have hardware acceleration enabled. That may be it, so I'll turn it off and see if that helps. Thanks.

 

You may ask for assistance from Mozilla. You may also reset Firefox to defaults, this reverts all your previously saved configurations to defaults.

 

Agreed - I also updated to Cyberfox 21.0.0:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/cyberfox/files/latest/download

Its already been updated! Waterfox hasn't been updated in ages and its developer appears to have abandoned further work on the project.

 

Becoming like google (chrome), gathering to much information. Like the old saying; "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

 

Anyone else seeing outbound localhost connection attempts on port 9050 with this version?

 

Firefox 21 ships with performance-profiling Health Report
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/15/firefox_21_health_report/

Transparency ? Maybe -
https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2013/05/14/firefox-heal-thyself/

 

The Cf guy beats Ff to the updates every time! You'll see on a freeware site Ffxx is out. You try to manually upgrade through your Ff and you can't yet. Yesterday, the freeware sites had Cf available before Ff was. Just amazing. I requested I wanted to donate and he told me he appreciated the fact I wanted to do that and that is all he cared about!

 

Actually, there was a Cyberfox 21 pre-release out a couple of days earlier, even before the actual release. From what I can tell, there were no changes made on the CF pre to release version. So CF's developer is definitely quite active in it's upkeep, and on the ball..

 

Firefox 21 Fixes Three Critical Flaws, Introduces New Health Report:

http://threatpost.com/firefox-21-fixes-three-critical-flaws-introduces-new-health-report/

 

Mozilla pushes out new Firefox and Thunderbird: 8 security advisories, 3 critical fixes:

http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/201...rbird-8-security-advisories-3-critical-fixes/

 

Let's not even attempt to compare an OS to a browser here, they are two entirely different universes. Here's the issue with your argument, you believe fast releases are a sign of shoddy development and inferiority, right? So why does Google do the same thing with Chrome? Google has money Mozilla only dreams of, in fact, Mozilla gets a good portion of its funding from Google.

Want to know why these browsers get fast releases now? Because browsers have millions of lines of code put in by imperfect humans. Fast releases allow newer features to be built in more quickly, allow for "better browser" building much faster and, as a passive effect, allow vulnerabilities to be found much faster and patched much faster, along with bugs. Instead of griping when Firefox releases a .01 a week after a major release, be thankful that these bugs/vulnerabilities were busted very quickly compared to how things used to be.

 

This seems to be a common occurrence among many Wilders members these days. Many of you take things WAAAAYYY too "LITERALLY" rather than understanding the true comparison being made. I am comparing the "CIRCUMSTANCES".......not the actual products! SHEESH!

Sorry, but I don't see Google doing the same thing with Chrome. I've had both Chrome and Firefox installed the same amount of time on this new machine (a little over a month) and Chrome hasn't updated once. Firefox, meanwhile, has upgraded to version 20, then version 20.0.1, and now is apparently ready to release v21.

This is also the first time I've installed and used Chrome, so time will tell if it is as bad about updates. I can't speak to the history of the browser since it's inception in 2008, just to the amount of time that I have had in installed myself.

And this is where we differ. You want everyone to "be thankful" that they corrected their mistake after they didn't get it right the first time. I want them to take their time and get it right the first time so there is no need for a correction to take place so soon afterward.

 

Google updating is actually faster (about every six weeks compared to FF), but obviously has a different schedule than Mozilla. No one gets it all right the first time. Not Mozilla, not Google, not MS, not Opera, not Apple, etc. No one. You're asking for perfection, and in doing so, you misunderstand how building these applications work and also how working at these corporations works. Try working for Microsoft for a while, see how "perfect" you can make your project or your part in a project and try to "take your time". Come back and tell me how that went.

 

Here's the problem. And it's really quite simple.

We live in a day and age where people want things YESTERDAY! Patience is practically non-existent. And in a day and age where 6 month old technology is considered "outdated and obsolete".....many/most companies are trying to be "the first" to come out with this, or "the first" to come out with that. And in doing so, they rush products into production and ultimately release when they simply are NOT ready to be released! Never mind that they had to come back a short time later and correct all their mistakes.....all they're worried about is getting it out first and foremost.

And that's where I have the problem. I don't mind waiting a little longer for a "new" version of anything. All I want is for the finished product to be ready for prime time and not just something that was rushed into release.

 

I don't at all disagree that there are some problems with "speed releases". I do however stand by my previous comment that it's better than what we used to have, where bugs may gone on for a year or more before being fixed and even vulnerabilities took a while. A huge however applies here, with some vendors *coughOperacough*, they've sped up releases and still never get around to fixing bugs. Also, Firefox still has memory-releasing issues that has plagued it since, God, I think Firefox 3, 4 maybe? Faster releases are an overall better thing for end users, but they're not without their own imperfections.

The whole "6 months and it's outdated" issue is a direct result of marketing and not really a "people issue". The tech companies have drilled it into consumer heads that newer is better and we're missing out if we're one version behind. Look at the iPhone line and tell me the major differences between 4 and 5. Kind of difficult, isn't it? People are impatient, yes, though one could say people always have been. But marketers have really been responsible for what you're describing.