Firefox - More fire and fewer cancer warnings than California

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Firefox - More fire and fewer cancer warnings than California

«‹›362 »

Powered Descent: Jul 13, 2008; We haven't had that spirit here since 1969.

I've been hanging back and using the ESR release since before the big changeover. But it seems that my indispensable extensions are catching up (or being replaced) faster than I expected, so I'm tiptoeing into the 57+ waters.

I've actually been eager to do so since I first read about first-party isolation. Turn this on in about :config, and each domain you visit will get its own "sandbox" to keep its cookies in. So foo.com gets to set its own cookie, and a google tracker cookie, and a facebook tracker cookie, and a nasty-advertisements.com tracker cookie. But when I go to bar.com, that site isn't able to see any of those cookies that were set by foo.com (or anywhere else). It's able to set its own version of all these, of course, but foo.com (or any other site) won't be able to read them. This is exactly the way cookies should have worked from the beginning and it makes it a hell of a lot harder for advertisers (or whoever) to track you around the web.

There's unfortunately a small Firefox bug that prevents the usual cookie-clearing extensions from working when first-party isolation is turned on. But hey, the very nature of FPI makes routine cookie clearing a hell of a lot less necessary in the first place, so I'm not overly concerned. I'm sure it'll be fixed in due course anyway.

When I first heard about the big Quantum changeover coming, I expected it would be another big step down for Firefox. But I'm glad to say I was wrong this time. I'm really liking it so far. Nice work, Mozilla peeps.

# ? Dec 3, 2017 19:34

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 21:29

wormil: Sep 12, 2002; Hulk will smoke you!

xamphear posted:

Why? Firefox has never been more Chrome-like, or at a closer feature parity with Chrome. It's only long-time Firefox users who are getting dinged by these changes. If you're coming from Chrome, what recent changes to Firefox are making it worse than Chrome?

Salr is dead apparently. Otherwise I'm not having any problems just saw all the complaints

# ? Dec 3, 2017 19:50

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

Powered Descent posted:

I've actually been eager to do so since I first read about first-party isolation. Turn this on in about :config, and each domain you visit will get its own "sandbox" to keep its cookies in. So foo.com gets to set its own cookie, and a google tracker cookie, and a facebook tracker cookie, and a nasty-advertisements.com tracker cookie. But when I go to bar.com, that site isn't able to see any of those cookies that were set by foo.com (or anywhere else). It's able to set its own version of all these, of course, but foo.com (or any other site) won't be able to read them. This is exactly the way cookies should have worked from the beginning and it makes it a hell of a lot harder for advertisers (or whoever) to track you around the web.

This is the best thing Ive heard about the new version so far.

# ? Dec 3, 2017 19:54

iospace: Jan 19, 2038

wormil posted:

Salr is dead apparently. Otherwise I'm not having any problems just saw all the complaints

It's not. The chrome one has been ported over and I think it just needs to be submitted to Mozilla now.

# ? Dec 3, 2017 20:42

No. 9: Feb 8, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Praise, can't wait

# ? Dec 3, 2017 21:14

Lum: Aug 13, 2003

astral posted:

If this is anything like a similar issue I had where an extension didn't want to validate correctly, you may have to manually edit extensions.json in your user profile folder (back it up first, of course). Look for flags with the word "disabled" in them.

There wern't any disabled by this, but the next day they started working again. Except tree style tab which was enabled but not showing anything until I reinstalled it. I have no idea if the others are working or not.

Im_Special posted:

I'm curious just how far did you set it back? hours, months, years?

I set it to 8th October 2017 at 8PM. (Undertale fans now know exactly which secret I was going for

)

# ? Dec 3, 2017 23:48

wormil: Sep 12, 2002; Hulk will smoke you!

iospace posted:

It's not. The chrome one has been ported over and I think it just needs to be submitted to Mozilla now.

Cool. Chrome has been aggravating me for awhile and seems to be a memory hog so I decided to move back to Firefox. Also, text looks way better in FF for some reason.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 05:00

iospace: Jan 19, 2038

wormil posted:

Cool. Chrome has been aggravating me for awhile and seems to be a memory hog so I decided to move back to Firefox. Also, text looks way better in FF for some reason.

Not to mention that first party isolation thing you mentioned.

e: it breaks twitter embed here

iospace fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Dec 4, 2017

# ? Dec 4, 2017 06:01

mike12345: Jul 14, 2008; "Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries."

Powered Descent posted:

I've been hanging back and using the ESR release since before the big changeover. But it seems that my indispensable extensions are catching up (or being replaced) faster than I expected, so I'm tiptoeing into the 57+ waters.

I've actually been eager to do so since I first read about first-party isolation. Turn this on in about :config, and each domain you visit will get its own "sandbox" to keep its cookies in. So foo.com gets to set its own cookie, and a google tracker cookie, and a facebook tracker cookie, and a nasty-advertisements.com tracker cookie. But when I go to bar.com, that site isn't able to see any of those cookies that were set by foo.com (or anywhere else). It's able to set its own version of all these, of course, but foo.com (or any other site) won't be able to read them. This is exactly the way cookies should have worked from the beginning and it makes it a hell of a lot harder for advertisers (or whoever) to track you around the web.

There's unfortunately a small Firefox bug that prevents the usual cookie-clearing extensions from working when first-party isolation is turned on. But hey, the very nature of FPI makes routine cookie clearing a hell of a lot less necessary in the first place, so I'm not overly concerned. I'm sure it'll be fixed in due course anyway.

When I first heard about the big Quantum changeover coming, I expected it would be another big step down for Firefox. But I'm glad to say I was wrong this time. I'm really liking it so far. Nice work, Mozilla peeps.

I ran into some trouble with isolation by giving paypal.com its own container. Now when I pay on a site (that's not in a container) with paypal, the forward doesn't always work, or paypal can't figure out what to do with the request.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 14:02

isndl: May 2, 2012; I WON A CONTEST IN TG AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS CUSTOM TITLE

code:

Web Content (pid 1036)
Explicit Allocations

4,381,102,080 B (100.0%) -- explicit
|--4,204,041,616 B (95.96%) -- heap-unclassified

Pretty clearly some sort of leakage or bloat going on! Refreshing a bunch of old tabs seems to have cleared it up though. Just need some kind of tab monitoring system now to warn about tabs going rogue instead of mass refreshing to see what happens.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 14:16

Lum: Aug 13, 2003

Android version of 57.

If I do a google image search, open the full size image and then long press the image, what I want to do is be given an option to download that image. This happens about 10% of the time and the rest of the time the text copying prompts come up.

I haven't established any pattern to it, how can I reliably save images in this way?

# ? Dec 4, 2017 22:44

Ola: Jul 19, 2004

Lum posted:

Android version of 57.

If I do a google image search, open the full size image and then long press the image, what I want to do is be given an option to download that image. This happens about 10% of the time and the rest of the time the text copying prompts come up.

I haven't established any pattern to it, how can I reliably save images in this way?

It varies with what type of pic and if you're actually looking at just a pic or a page. Check the url to confirm. If it's an .svg, I get a prompt to "select all" if I'm viewing the full picture and "save as" etc if I'm viewing it in the GIS carousel. I find viewing pictures is a bit of a pain on any mobile browser. First there's the image carousels used on most sites that takes the old convention of "click for big version" and turns it into "click to make the small picture a bit smaller, but with a big black frame around". Then when you try to pinch zoom, you also zoom the other elements on the page, so suddenly a huge SUBSCRIBE TO OUR drat NEWSLETTER starts floating into the frame.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 23:00

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

Ola posted:

It varies with what type of pic and if you're actually looking at just a pic or a page.

I got the two different responses on the same picture though.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 23:09

Ola: Jul 19, 2004

Flipperwaldt posted:

I got the two different responses on the same picture though.

Ok, I get consistent behaviour, at least as far as I've noticed. Maybe an accidental double tap or tapping at the edge made it do "select all"?

# ? Dec 4, 2017 23:21

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

There's a massive design flaw for touch on the Windows version since 51 where a long press both means "right click" and "select text and give me handles to adjust the selection". The consequence is that whenever you right click something, the nearest (in html terms) text will get automatically selected and the wrong version of the context menu will show (ie the one relevant to the text instead of the one relevant to the thing you actually right clicked).

~~I'm~~ I was hopeful the thing Lum's experiencing is related, so they may finally sort this poo poo out. Well, hopeful is too big a word. Nobody cares about touch on Wndows.

I have the accessibility caret thing disabled in about :config to combat this, but the consequence is that I can't select text anymore unless by double tapping for a whole word. Or connecting a mouse. Because the twats thought it prudent to make Firefox interpret touch, instead of letting Windows handle it. Which means regular drag selecting (with your finger, just like you would with a mouse) is now disabled. Good thing the fall creators update to Windows included a virtual touchpad, I guess.

fake edit

Ola posted:

Maybe an accidental double tap or tapping at the edge made it do "select all"?

You know what, intentionally doing that absolutely predictably gives me the copy menu (even on straight jpgs), while being really careful not to do it gives me the save as menu. There doesn't actually seem to be a way to deselect without going back to the previous page though, which is not good.

# ? Dec 4, 2017 23:45

iospace: Jan 19, 2038

Upon further investigation, the Tracking Protection option is what screws up twitter embeds, not First Party Isolation.

Still, they're planning on blocking yet another way of fingerprinting your computer in 58, so.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 01:07

Nalin: Sep 29, 2007; Hair Elf

Tracking Protection screwing up twitter embeds is quite well known. It basically comes up on every other page and I am surprised it wasn't immediately called out for you. The Tracking Protection feature uses the Disconnect.me basic filter.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 04:49

iospace: Jan 19, 2038

Nalin posted:

Tracking Protection screwing up twitter embeds is quite well known. It basically comes up on every other page and I am surprised it wasn't immediately called out for you. The Tracking Protection feature uses the Disconnect.me basic filter.

Oh well. I have it off for SA, on for other sites, and still have the FPI on.

In other words, get hosed ads.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 05:49

KiteAuraan: Aug 5, 2014; JER GEDDA FERDA RADDA ARA!

Has anyone else had a problem with broken .gifs on Twitter and Facebook? I recall having this problem before and having to mess with something in config, but I cannot for the life of me remember what, or find the article again. If it's even the same issue, this was like, 3 versions ago.

Edit: Fixed it. It's because Facebook converts .gifs to .mp4s and .mp4 support is turned off by default in Firefox.

KiteAuraan fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Dec 5, 2017

# ? Dec 5, 2017 07:18

The Dark One: Aug 19, 2005; I'm your friend and I'm not going to just stand by and let you do this!

I don't know about Facebook, but Twitter transcodes all GIFs into video elements to save on bandwidth. It might be a codec issue.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 08:00

xamphear: Apr 9, 2002; SILK FOR CALDÉ!

KiteAuraan posted:

.mp4 support is turned off by default in Firefox.

Say what?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 15:50

von Braun: Oct 30, 2009; Broder Daniel Forever

Is it possible to zoom in/out with the trackpad on Mac? I found some addon on the page but it's not working in this version.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 17:15

clockworkjoe: May 31, 2000; Rolled a 1 on the random encounter table, didn't you?

The new version of Noscript is terrible. It creates a popup window for XSS sites but when I click to always block something, the window keeps coming back. Is there a comparable add on I could use instead of noscript?

Also, Lastpass isn't saving my login info even when I tell it to. I have to type in user name and password every time I close and reopen FF.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 20:22

astral: Apr 26, 2004

clockworkjoe posted:

The new version of Noscript is terrible. It creates a popup window for XSS sites but when I click to always block something, the window keeps coming back. Is there a comparable add on I could use instead of noscript?

Also, Lastpass isn't saving my login info even when I tell it to. I have to type in user name and password every time I close and reopen FF.

Don't use lastpass, but especially don't use their browser addon.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 20:38

clockworkjoe: May 31, 2000; Rolled a 1 on the random encounter table, didn't you?

astral posted:

Don't use lastpass, but especially don't use their browser addon.

Why?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 20:55

astral: Apr 26, 2004

clockworkjoe posted:

Why?

Their attitude in general to security is �whoops�. The addon in particular has had numerous vulnerabilities where the addon would be tricked into disclosing your passwords.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:06

iospace: Jan 19, 2038

astral posted:

Don't use lastpass, but especially don't use their browser addon.

Is keepass ok, provided you don't use anything in browser?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:10

clockworkjoe: May 31, 2000; Rolled a 1 on the random encounter table, didn't you?

So is there a good password manager with a Firefox add on?

edit: and a good replacement for Noscript?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:11

KiteAuraan: Aug 5, 2014; JER GEDDA FERDA RADDA ARA!

xamphear posted:

Say what?

Or at least, it always turns off on my end. The value that is always set to false after a reset of Firefox is media.eme.vp9-in-mp4.enabled. So it's actually VP9 codec stuff, that for some reason certain sites use along with MP4 or something.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:13

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

clockworkjoe posted:

The new version of Noscript is terrible. It creates a popup window for XSS sites but when I click to always block something, the window keeps coming back. Is there a comparable add on I could use instead of noscript?

uMatrix. You can easily make it only block scripts if you insist that's all that should happen. But it can block a lot more if you want. And you can globally allow script sources like NoScript would, again, if you feel that's proper. But it can allow on a per originating and per destination site basis.

It doesn't have popups for anything. It just blocks or allows based on what you've set it to do.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:27

clockworkjoe: May 31, 2000; Rolled a 1 on the random encounter table, didn't you?

Flipperwaldt posted:

uMatrix. You can easily make it only block scripts if you insist that's all that should happen. But it can block a lot more if you want. And you can globally allow script sources like NoScript would, again, if you feel that's proper. But it can allow on a per originating and per destination site basis.

It doesn't have popups for anything. It just blocks or allows based on what you've set it to do.

does it require a lot of configuration to be useful or does it work pretty well from a fresh install?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 21:46

astral: Apr 26, 2004

iospace posted:

Is keepass ok, provided you don't use anything in browser?

About as good as it gets. The standalone 1password is pretty solid too, but that costs money, isn't well-supported (though the company has good support in general), and I'm not even sure they sell it any longer with the subscription stuff they are pushing now. On the plus side, I did read something saying their next major version will go back to supporting standalone vaults if that interests you.

clockworkjoe posted:

So is there a good password manager with a Firefox add on?

1password has browser extensions. Personally I wouldn't recommend using any browser extensions for password management but out of what's available their company has the best attitude w.r.t. security.

There are third-party addons available for KeePass, too, but I haven't used any of them so I can't speak to how well they work or how secure they might be. I know some other posters here have experience with those though.

astral fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Dec 5, 2017

# ? Dec 5, 2017 22:00

Avenging Dentist: Oct 1, 2005; oh my god is that a circular saw that does not go in my mouth aaaaagh

clockworkjoe posted:

So is there a good password manager with a Firefox add on?

Bitwarden maybe?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 22:05

Ola: Jul 19, 2004

My password management system:

1. Persistent logins.
2. Password recovery functions.
3. A very strong password on my main email.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 22:21

Chilled Milk: Jun 22, 2003; No one here is alone,
satellites in every home

von Braun posted:

Is it possible to zoom in/out with the trackpad on Mac? I found some addon on the page but it's not working in this version.

This is the WebExtension version of the one I've been using. It's very chunky but it works.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/zoom-page-we/

# ? Dec 5, 2017 22:26

dont be mean to me: May 2, 2007; I'm interplanetary, bitch
Let's go to Mars

xamphear posted:

Say what?

It'll fetch the h264 codec at some point. There's also a toggle for playing DRM under the file handling box; this decides whether or not it downloads the Widevine crypdec, or tosses it if it's turned off after you have it. Blah blah liability licensing sandboxing yada yada yada. (Also Mozilla used Adobe Primetime for a while, but Google's methods eventually get everywhere.)

Also webm is turned off by default, at least on Windows. For systems without hardware VP9 decode I'd still toggle media.mediasource.webm.enabled to true in about :config and use h264ify, but that's not a universal recommendation.

I don't even know if Firefox Quantum still has plugins besides those and gently caress Flash Player.

dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Dec 5, 2017

# ? Dec 5, 2017 23:04

Volguus: Mar 3, 2009

Ola posted:

My password management system:

1. Persistent logins.
2. Password recovery functions.
3. A very strong password on my main email.

My password management system:
1. 1234
2. 1234
3. FuckYouForNotTaking1234

It works. Nobody would ever guess 1234 as a password. I mean, who on earth would put 1234 as their password?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 23:13

dont be mean to me: May 2, 2007; I'm interplanetary, bitch
Let's go to Mars

Volguus posted:

My password management system:
1. 1234
2. 1234
3. FuckYouForNotTaking1234

It works. Nobody would ever guess 1234 as a password. I mean, who on earth would put 1234 as their password?

I WOULD but it's too long to fit on my luggage.

# ? Dec 5, 2017 23:15

slidebite: Nov 6, 2005; Good egg

Is there a problem with Firefox and forms? For some reason, I couldn't log into my banking website today. No matter what I did, got an error. Called tech support they reset my password (they have to do it themselves, I can't do an online recovery). Manually typed in my client card and my new temp password, still wouldn't accept it. Tech guy said Firefox gives them trouble and to use IE (gently caress that). Tried it on my android tablet, worked fine. For the heck of it, quickly downloaded Chrome, got to the login screen, worked like a charm. Go back to Firefox and it STILL doesn't work. I was using 56.xx. Upgraded to 57, still no dice. Deleted all my banking cookies and made no difference.

Any idea WTF is going on?

# ? Dec 5, 2017 23:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 21:29

djssniper: Jan 10, 2003

slidebite posted:

Is there a problem with Firefox and forms? For some reason, I couldn't log into my banking website today. No matter what I did, got an error. Called tech support they reset my password (they have to do it themselves, I can't do an online recovery). Manually typed in my client card and my new temp password, still wouldn't accept it. Tech guy said Firefox gives them trouble and to use IE (gently caress that). Tried it on my android tablet, worked fine. For the heck of it, quickly downloaded Chrome, got to the login screen, worked like a charm. Go back to Firefox and it STILL doesn't work. I was using 56.xx. Upgraded to 57, still no dice. Deleted all my banking cookies and made no difference.

Any idea WTF is going on?

I've found logging onto some sites an issue if I have UBlocker enabled for it, no idea why, works fine in safari (I'm on a mac)

# ? Dec 6, 2017 00:26

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Firefox - More fire and fewer cancer warnings than California

«‹›362 »