A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox
Certain Firefox users may come across a message in the extensions panel indicating that their add-ons are not allowed on the site currently open. We have introduced a new back-end feature to only allow some extensions monitored by Mozilla to run on specific websites for various reasons, including security concerns.
What is this bullshit? Feel like this will lead to adblocks being blocked for certain websites under the guise of "security", aka: we don't have to justify shit to you.
It's not going to inconvenience you that much, and the proof for that is that this has always been the case: extensions would never run on e.g. addons.mozilla.org. This makes sense; you don't want extensions to trick you into installing other extensions, for example, or to hijack your sync password.
It looks like the main change is that this actually loosens this restriction: it looks like some trusted extensions from now on will be allowed.
To disable "quarantined domains" if you have to : https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/quarantined-domains
1st thing to do on every release from now on.
This is a step too far for me. My device, my choice of browser and I am adult enough to make my own decisions.
Oh come on, it's still a free and open source browser. As seen in the other comments, it's a badly worded security feature for firefox internal pages and mozilla pages.
It's not going to kill adblock, it won't send your data everywhere and it can be disabled through an option as well as by simply building firefox yourself.
Everybody should stop being so negative towards open source developers.
Did everyone in this thread drink the conspiracy theory kool-aid or something? The accusations here are wild.
Is there even some way to see which addons this applies to on which websites? I can't find anything. Or am I just going to find out randomly while browsing?
I was curious as well so I looked at the git tree. I'm not familiar with Firefox code, but I'm assuming I found the list:
pref("extensions.webextensions.restrictedDomains",
"accounts-static.cdn.mozilla.net,accounts.firefox.com,
addons.cdn.mozilla.net,addons.mozilla.org,
api.accounts.firefox.com,content.cdn.mozilla.net,
discovery.addons.mozilla.org,install.mozilla.org,
oauth.accounts.firefox.com,profile.accounts.firefox.com,
support.mozilla.org,sync.services.mozilla.com");
From here
So it looks like it's mostly to do with the account system of Firefox. I'm not sure why their websites would need special protection, but whatever. It's not malicious, for now
Makes sense. You don't want Addons to navigate to the addons page and install other addons. You also don't want to give them access to the firefox sync data through your account to do the same from that end.
Thanks! Nicer list:
at least it can be disabled in the prefs for now
“Security concerns” is such a bullshit reason. If an add on is such a security concern, why host it in the first place?
I’m disappointed Mozilla is going down this path, but not surprised.
So allowing any random, possibly compromised, possibly installed by malware, add-on to run during the Firefox account login pages (see the list of URLs in this thread) isn't a security concern to you?
The alternative would be to give addons so little permission that the damage wouldn't matter. Effectively break the whole system, i'm fine with the ignore list.
To me it sounds more like they plan on blocking all addons (other than some whitelist of "trusted" addons) on important pages (like the Google login page maybe?).
I just hope that Librewolf will remove this.
You can always download the xpi and install it manually
this doesn't block you from installing extensions. It blocks them from running on certain protected pages, whatever they may be
On Linux, middle clicks on the new tab button will now open the xclipboard contents in the new tab. If the xclipboard content is a URL then that URL is opened, any other text is opened with your default search provider.
Mega useful!
Why is this not on Windows. This sounds actually cool.
Because Windows doesn't have two different copy/paste mechanisms like X does.
(X has "highlight text to copy"/"middle-click to paste" and "ctrl-c to copy"/"ctrl-v to paste", which have completely different origins (homegrown Unix vs. copying Windows) and don't even share the same clipboard. Frankly, although it can be useful it's also kind of a mess.)
Agreed. It’s a huge mess.
Dang, yeah!
Of particular note: This is the last version that will support macOS 10.12 (Sierra), 10.13 (High Sierra), and 10.14 (Mojave). They'll get an extended support release of Firefox 115 that'll receive security updates for ~1 year. Source: mozilla.org
Most important for some of us
Hardware video decoding is now enabled for Intel GPUs on Linux.
Yey! Test it by starting intel_gpu_top and than playing video in firefox, if row "Video" goes over 0.0% it is working!
intel-gpu-top: Intel Coffeelake (Gen9) @ /dev/dri/card0 - 921/ 925 MHz; 38% RC6
1.78/10.41 W; 813 irqs/s
IMC reads: 3883 MiB/s
IMC writes: 1632 MiB/s
ENGINES BUSY MI_SEMA MI_WAIT
Render/3D 12.82% |████▊ | 0% 0%
Blitter 0.00% | | 0% 0%
Video 27.99% |██████████▍ | 0% 0%
VideoEnhance 0.00% | | 0% 0%
PID NAME Render/3D Blitter Video VideoEnhance
578 RDD Process | || ||███ || |
32431 firefox-bin |▊ || || || |
2301 elogind-daemon |▌ || || || |
4151 pcmanfm-qt | || || || |
4153 keepassxc | || || || |
4154 pasystray | || || || |
4521 slack | || || || |
6067 chrome | || || || |
29222 jcef_helper | || || || |
Of course, you need second monitor, it goes down to 0 if video is not visible, since Firefox is not rendering it.
What happened to the cookie banner reduction? I can't find it in the release notes.
I think they hit some snags that it wasn't working satisfactorily yet, so hopefully in a future release 🤞
Ah man, this was the main feature I was hyped for. Thanks for the info!
According to this article it looks like it's in the beta for the next version though: https://9to5linux.com/firefox-116-beta-brings-quick-actions-in-address-bar-improves-wayland-support