Beoardielingen foar Firefox Multi-Account Containers
Firefox Multi-Account Containers troch Firefox
Wurdearringen foar Amazing Mr. X
Wurdearring: 2 fan 5
troch Amazing Mr. X, 4 jierren lynThis has a lot of potential, but it's not quite ready for prime time. There's a few specific problems here:
Firstly, add-ons can't communicate with the content of containers. This breaks functionality in most add-ons in really weird and unexpected ways. It'd be nice if we could whitelist add-ons to have access to relevant containers, but most users would probably want all of their add-ons to have full access to all of their containers by default and wouldn't expect them to be functionally blocked as they are.
Secondly, containers don't nicely handle redirects. A lot of sites, especially corporate ones, will redirect through several different domains and subdomains when performing the login process. Containers set to "Limit to Designated Sites" won't operate correctly with these redirects as the redirect pages are not true web pages and don't allow you to sit on them long enough to click the address bar button to always open them in the specified container. This cannot currently be remedied by having foreknowledge of the complete list of redirect sites, as the "Limit to Designated Sites" list cannot be manually edited or appended outside of the limited address bar button method.
Thirdly, The VPN integration isn't particularly secure in premise. Being a per-container opt-in means that entities snooping on the line will immediately see that there's something suspiciously different in the data packets coming from your protected containers compared to the rest of your typical https encrypted traffic. This makes isolating these packets, on the fly, infuriatingly trivial. Making this a per-container opt-out would all but eliminate this problem, as attackers would have to have foreknowledge of the originating container to do this effectively in all circumstances. It'd also be great to see connection protocol options ( OpenVPN, WireGuard, etc. ) as well as other VPN provider options as that'd make it that much harder to try and figure out what's going on in the encrypted container traffic and would better protect Mozilla VPN itself. Right now it's technically more secure to not use the VPN feature at all.
I think the basic idea here is really excellent, but these problems really do drag it down. Something made and maintained by Mozilla shouldn't have this many problems. I still think this is potentially useful to certain technical professionals trying to isolate their sensitive internal sites from other web apps, but the average user is going to have too many headaches to be able to use this effectively.
If you know what you're doing, keep the above points in-mind and go ahead and give it a try.
Anyone else? Hope Mozilla addresses some of these issues in a future release. I'll update my review if they do.
Firstly, add-ons can't communicate with the content of containers. This breaks functionality in most add-ons in really weird and unexpected ways. It'd be nice if we could whitelist add-ons to have access to relevant containers, but most users would probably want all of their add-ons to have full access to all of their containers by default and wouldn't expect them to be functionally blocked as they are.
Secondly, containers don't nicely handle redirects. A lot of sites, especially corporate ones, will redirect through several different domains and subdomains when performing the login process. Containers set to "Limit to Designated Sites" won't operate correctly with these redirects as the redirect pages are not true web pages and don't allow you to sit on them long enough to click the address bar button to always open them in the specified container. This cannot currently be remedied by having foreknowledge of the complete list of redirect sites, as the "Limit to Designated Sites" list cannot be manually edited or appended outside of the limited address bar button method.
Thirdly, The VPN integration isn't particularly secure in premise. Being a per-container opt-in means that entities snooping on the line will immediately see that there's something suspiciously different in the data packets coming from your protected containers compared to the rest of your typical https encrypted traffic. This makes isolating these packets, on the fly, infuriatingly trivial. Making this a per-container opt-out would all but eliminate this problem, as attackers would have to have foreknowledge of the originating container to do this effectively in all circumstances. It'd also be great to see connection protocol options ( OpenVPN, WireGuard, etc. ) as well as other VPN provider options as that'd make it that much harder to try and figure out what's going on in the encrypted container traffic and would better protect Mozilla VPN itself. Right now it's technically more secure to not use the VPN feature at all.
I think the basic idea here is really excellent, but these problems really do drag it down. Something made and maintained by Mozilla shouldn't have this many problems. I still think this is potentially useful to certain technical professionals trying to isolate their sensitive internal sites from other web apps, but the average user is going to have too many headaches to be able to use this effectively.
If you know what you're doing, keep the above points in-mind and go ahead and give it a try.
Anyone else? Hope Mozilla addresses some of these issues in a future release. I'll update my review if they do.
7.940 beoardielingen
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Aleksandr Kwaskoff, ien dei lynthe best extension - why I need to searching it and it's not in default distribution!?
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 19824103, ien dei lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch superoci, 3 dagen lynVery useful extensions, especially when you have multiple accounts on a site and don't want to constantly log in or out or when you just don't want a site to access data from other sites you visit on your main profile.
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Crusader, 6 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch novo, 6 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch puterpeter, 6 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch JT, 8 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Daniel V. Lenskiy, 8 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Dmitry Rostenkovsky, 8 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch hybrid2102, 8 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 14013255, 9 dagen lynIt's only because of this extension that I use Firefox. Cool feature. There is no such option in any browser.
- Wurdearring: 4 fan 5troch hackel, 10 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 4 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 17586361, 11 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 19805267, 11 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch diegof59, 12 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch MOSIMANEWAPULA WHITE TABANE, 12 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 15082755, 13 dagen lynThis is one of the core plugins I use (in addition to Ublock Origin).
With the account sync, containers are also remembered across different computers as well, so I don't have to set up the containers on every new laptop or reinstall of firefox. Sometimes I mistakenly open a website in the wrong container because I don't always map every single website to a container, but most of the time it's a non-issue.
I'm surprised this is still an add-on and not a core Firefox feature. - Wurdearring: 1 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 18184964, 14 dagen lynIt doesn't work for me. I cannot create a container where I am logged into Google and simultaneously a container where I'm not logged in.
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch luca_gohan, 14 dagen lyn
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 19799825, 15 dagen lynL'add on correspond parfaitement à ce dont j'ai besoin
- Wurdearring: 5 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 14066212, 16 dagen lynA must have, cannot imagine my workflow without it anymore.
- Wurdearring: 4 fan 5troch Benjamin MOREAUX, 17 dagen lynVery handy for managing multiple M365 or Google tenants.
For me, the only thing missing is the ability to have “private browsing” containers and a way to always open in a container, for example when editing a bookmark. - Wurdearring: 1 fan 5troch Firefox-brûker 19794127, 18 dagen lyn