Firefox's massive overhaul moves to beta

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by lotuseclat79, Mar 21, 2014.

  1. Anonfame1

    Anonfame1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Posts:
    218
    Stop innovating... and you die. I will admit there seems to be a bit of "copying" and has been for awhile- thats concerning.

    It seems Mozilla is lost when it comes to the UI, and they're playing catchup with security/sandboxing. They do have some good stuff coming though so we'll see what happens overall.

    Im not using Chrome/Chromium or Edge/IE in place of FF regardless of what it becomes though. Its a dark world when only corporate software ecosystems exist for the webbrowser...
     
  2. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,150
    Location:
    USA
    True, but there's also "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". They should have stop fixing it when it wasn't broke. Too late.
     
  3. Cache

    Cache Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Posts:
    338
    Agree entirely with that. FF may not be perfect but it is the only mainstream option if you value your privacy.
     
  4. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    830
    Well said :thumb: And sandboxing is done for me on Linux with Firejail.

    Absolutely. There is a reason why the Tor browser is based upon Firefox and not Google Chrome, isn't it?
     
  5. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,324
    Location:
    USA
    It seems to me it's only the UI that there has been disagreement about. Firefox has continued to advance under the hood. e10s is already available with low integrity individual process tabs ala Chrome.
     
  6. Anonfame1

    Anonfame1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Posts:
    218
    I dont know... Firefox was exceptionally slow and crashy when Chrome came out. Chrome seemed to push Mozilla in the direction of speed and UI changes for awhile. The UI was a mixed bag (I agree they should have left it alone), but the speed and stability improvements- at least for me- have been awesome.

    I think they should have focused on rendering, standards compliance, security, speed, and privacy- the UI was the last thing they needed to mess with.
    Absolutely +1. We've seen Firefox recently take a focus on privacy in a way other browsers wouldnt. Example: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Contextual_Identity_Project/Containers

    A world without Firefox would never see such tech come into existence. This is against the interests of Chrome for sure at least...
    +1 for firejail and also any MAC option (apparmor/RBAC/Tomoyo/SELinux). Where Firefox lags in sandboxing that firejail cant help as much with is between tabs/content processes, but they are working on it. And speaking of Tor browser, I've noted recently that FF has been incorporating some of the protections used by Torbrowser- a very good sign.

    Yeah, the UI has been the biggest mess. Since Chrome came out, Firefox has massively improved under the hood.
     
  7. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    830
    Actually all Tor browser patches are being added to mainline Firefox. Here's the wiki site and here the corresponding meta ticket.

    EDIT:

    This already works in Firefox 52 if you set privacy.userContext.enabled to true.
     
  8. Cache

    Cache Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Posts:
    338
    Thanks for the heads up on containers. That was new to me and sounds like an interesting development.
     
  9. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    1,916
    TOR-browser package is fail - and vulnerable since it uses a modified firefox version with - negative consequences.
    whatever mozilla people thought when adopting TOR technology - could not have been much - stupid decision to keep this crap alive.
    TOR is futile and vulnerable and it makes it not better with firefox, neither inside nor outside.
    since google and mozilla had their joint venture - they still exchange knowledge.

    concerning chrome and privacy - there was (!) a time when chrome send lot of telemetry. now they dont - unless you use a google account which makes you transparent. even the default google extensions for google services makes you transparent. you wont have that with opera/vivaldi/chromium

    its not inventing - its the direction mozilla like to go. eg myself dont like the (hidden) system extensions - for what? over a dozen now, active, dropped or upcoming. now they rudder back with photon.

    they ask people what to implement - at least they dont care. i have seen so many features come and go i never needed. on some side they reduce features, on the other they add some crap. pocket come, pocket go, hello come, hello go, webrtc come, webrtc go.

    concerning containers - nice option, for windows 10 not needed as it has hyper-v container. there exist a model where all programs are running i separate containers.
    but the firefox feature is for security purpose only, not privacy (see article).

    the general market share for firefox is getting lower - people dont really care about security or privacy if the browser is not stable. further mozilla made another wrong decision, from my view - they put some bugfixes only into the the next major version instead releasing a bugfixed version. 52.0.1/.2 were only released because of high impacts, but some really important bugs have to wait for v53 which is upcoming in some weeks. why not 52.0.3? it would be possible. but that would mean they would go back to the old release system. one reason people leave firefox - waiting for bugfixes in the next major.

    my decision to swap browser was the upcoming webextensions - to get an overview what might possible. and for me it is possible. i dont know what extensions survive v56 - or were re-invented. there is NO clear spoken word about, only fog or whispering.

    privacy - i dont feel spied with opera or chromium, not more or less like with firefox. i dont know source code nor am i able to analyse. did you ever had a look into your profile(s) how many information firefox collects even it dont send them?
    good to know what may be possible:
    http://www.ghacks.net/2017/02/12/ghacks-net-firefox-user-js-config-0-11-is-out/
    impressed? i was!
     
  10. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    830
    Any evidence for these allegations?

    Any evidence for these allegations?

    Oh please :mad: Since, e.g., cookies and local storage are separated, containers obviously are also an advantage privacy-wise.

    So was I - about the many existing settings in Firefox which aren't even available in Chrome at all (for the most part). The default settings in Firefox might not be optimal for privacy conscious users but, at least, there are many options to finetune it to one's needs.
     
  11. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,150
    Location:
    USA
    Most of my comment was about changing the UI when it wasn't needed or even wanted by most users but I did not clarify.

    That said, I have some opinions on some of the other points. My opinions are mine and may not be someone else's experience. Yes, I believe they have been working on those things (rendering, standards compliance, security, speed, and privacy), but where rendering is concerned they still come in last. And they seem to be the only ones that can't pull off hardware acceleration. And I could forgive the crashes on my laptop, it is 9 years old, but it crashes on my desktop too, and no other browser does. Security, still also last. Speed, same thing. Privacy, they probably win on that. I'm not sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing since you said they should have been focused on those things and I feel they think they have been but haven't made the progress they should have. Extensions have been the thing that keeps me using it, we'll see how that plays out in the coming months. They have wasted a lot of time on things they never finished and nobody wanted. I hope they finally have some direction. It is not too late for them.
     
  12. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    1,916
    @summerheat - just the privacy policy for google services:
    https://www.google.com/policies/privacy/

    first paragraph
    further - if you are connected to google services and you open a website which contains the google analytics you directly feed google network with your interests
    https://termsfeed.com/blog/privacy-policy-google-analytics/

    For TOR you should have used google search, so easy and anyone except you is knowing
    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...-public-vulnerability-to-hack-suspects-on-tor
    this door is still not published and still open for the NSA.

    another door closed:
    https://arstechnica.com/security/20...e-for-firefox-0day-thats-under-active-attack/

    guess how many are still open?
    TOR is not able to deliver/receive SSL content, is not possible with the onion. any bad routing point is able to insert fake data and that has happend, not only by NSA. all is sent in plain data, readable for any idiot outside.

    concerning your cheap try about privacy in containers you should read that article again - in special the part for
    "What is (and isn't) separated between Containers"
    there is no speak of privacy concerned features - only separated data. so you can be hacked or exploited or tracked like any other firefox instance. the only difference is that leaving the container that data is
    gone. people think same for the privacy mode of firefox - data goes in, but not out. but privacy mode can read out existing data like cookies.
    a container is NOT more secure than a regulare instance of firefox, but in separates data like boxes in sandboxie. you probably need much more understanding.

    BTW
    https://wiki.mozilla.org/-->Security<--/Contextual_Identity_Project/Containers
    "Contextual Identity" is also a clear term.
     
  13. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    830
    So? I read that stuff before, and it doesn't comfort me. Google is a data collector par excellence. Besides, the point was that there are many switches in Firefox available to harden it privacy-wise which simply do not exist in Chrome.
    So? 2 vulnerabilities as it frequently happened in other browsers, too. They are no reason to badmouth Firefox and Tor in general.

    You're playing with words. Okay, I'm going to join you: That switch in about:config is called privacy.userContext.enabled. Now what?

    Besides, that wiki site explicitly says:
    If you don't agree that this is a clear advantage privacy-wise I can't help you.
     
  14. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    1,916
    in short - then you cant help me - if there is help needed.

    containers only separated the purpose of their usage. ofc its a side effect that there is no mix-up with other containers concerning specific data - and ofc that raises privacy.

    why mozilla stated it as a privacy-setting - dont know like other things they try to achieve.

    concerning TOR vs browsers vs vulnerabilities. mozilla fixes bugs and flaws as fast as possible - TOR not. and as noted there are still flaws in TOR which are not officially documented. and as noted TOR cant provide SSL and can be compromised and data also can be compromised. the NSA clearly stated that they are able to undermine computers of "targets" which are using tor. if nsa can do that, hackers (not relevant: which hacked the nsa) can do that too, both have the ability.

    depending of the user.js from ghacks - nothing to discuss. but those are really necessary in chrome, or chromium, or opera ...?

    the source code is available but google modifies its chrome for purpose and usage for its services - undocumented - i dont like google chrome and i dont use it. cant help out for chrome.
     
  15. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    22,276
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    FYI. Firefox 53 Beta 9 released April 4, 2017. Available via Internal Updater (11.6 MB).

    The Firefox Beta page's Free Download button downloads Firefox Setup Stub 53.0b9.exe (240 KB).

    The Download Firefox Beta in your language page now downloads 53.0b9.exe's 32-bit & 64-bit versions.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2017
  16. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    22,276
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    FYI. Firefox 53 Beta 10 released April 10, 2017. Available via Internal Updater (11.3 MB).

    The Firefox Beta page's Free Download button downloads Firefox Setup Stub 53.0b10.exe (240 KB).

    The Download Firefox Beta in your language page downloads 53.0b10.exe's 32-bit & 64-bit versions.
     
  17. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    22,276
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    FYI. Firefox 54 Beta 1 released April 21, 2017. Available via Internal Updater (21.3 MB).

    The Firefox Beta page's Free Download button downloads Firefox Setup Stub 54.0b1.exe (239 KB).

    The Download Firefox Beta in your language page now downloads 54.0b1.exe's 32-bit & 64-bit versions.

    Release Notes.
    System Requirements.

    Also, Firefox 54 for Developers.
    Firefox 54 Site Compatibility.
     
  18. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    22,276
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    FYI. Firefox 54 Beta 2 released April 25, 2017. Available via Internal Updater (11.7 MB).

    The Firefox Beta page's Free Download button downloads Firefox Setup Stub 54.0b2.exe (239 KB).

    The Download Firefox Beta in your language page now downloads 54.0b2.exe's 32-bit & 64-bit versions.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2017 at 4:01 PM
Loading...