Time to update: Firefox 114.0.1 fixes a startup crash
Mozilla has released Firefox 114.0.1 to the Stable channel. The new version of the open source web browser addresses a startup crash that some users of the web browser experienced after upgrading to Firefox 114.0, which Mozilla released earlier this week.
The update is available already and most Firefox installations will be updated automatically thanks to the browser's built-in updating functionality.
Firefox users may select Menu > Help > About Firefox to look up the installed version. Firefox runs a check for updates at the same time and will download any that it finds to the local system. A restart of the browser is required to complete the process.
The help page should list Firefox 114.0.1 as the version after the update.
The official Firefox 114.0.1 release notes lists just a single item: "Fix a startup crash". The linked bug report provides insight on the issue.
According to it, Mozilla noted an increase in startup crashes that affected Firefox 114 and the development versions Firefox 115 and 116. Updates are available for all affected versions of the Firefox web browser.
Mozilla engineers discovered that the issue was related to "old metadata files on disk containing origin types" that Firefox no longer supports. Firefox would previously load the metadata file and continue the startup process. The change introduced in Firefox 114 and newer versions introduced checks if the origin is supported by Firefox. If it is not, Firefox would fail with a crash, which Mozilla admits is not ideal.
Mozilla came up with a fix for the issue and after some testing in development versions of Firefox, has now pushed it to the stable version of the browser via the Firefox 114.0.1 update.
Firefox users interested in the specifics may follow the link to the bug report on Bugzilla, as it provides links to code changes and other information that are relevant.
The next major Firefox release, Firefox 115 Stable, will be released on July 4, 2023. It marks the beginning of a new ESR version for the browser. All Firefox users on Windows 7 and 8 devices will be moved to the ESR channel automatically at the time.
Now You: did you experience startup crashes recently in Firefox?
Yes, I currently cannot load Firefox and am getting an XULRunner error. Error: Platform version ‘114.0.1’ is not compatible with minVersion >= 114.0 maxVersion <= 114.0
Sajadi comment “It is all about ideology.” 29 first and 57
Poor you, one who evaluates a browser on ideology alone. All i see is a tool, do not care about the politics of the organization behind it as long as that tool serves a purpose and is OPEN SOURCE. 29 and 57 Firefox would be thoroughly outdated from a design standpoint and the Gecko engine got an overhaul since then and has improved considerably with quantum/servo technology, the quantum CSS engine is used to take advantage of modern multi core CPU’s. 29 and 57 is outdated in comparison. Some things are just more important to prioritize. You are living in the past.
Sajadi comment “the better Chromium without Blink”
Firefox is not chromium. Chromium has no rust and is not built as much for customizability as Firefox is. All you see is UI similarity and not the real differences. Vivaldi, Edge, Chrome are all closed source. Chromium is google literally, Firefox Mozilla is the only true alternative to chromium which is google authored code.
@Poorly Researched Heart
Forgot something…
Also, while i am no fan of that other person here, someone who intentionally defacing one’s nickname is pretty low on morals. That much has to be said.
And as you wrote about “customisation” – Mozilla has been hiding userchrome usage behind a flag and calls it “legacy feature” – so guess what is next on their chop block.
It clearly shows something: Mozilla is no longer interested in choice and diversity – it believes in “one size fits all” – and that is a pretty big low compared to their old morals and ideology which started to fade away after version 22 and ceased to exist in 57.
That is also a reason why a closed source program like Vivaldi – even if it is in the most cheapest way created – and is basically just mirroring Firefox with Classic theme restorer concept wise – is still WAY superior compared to Firefox these days.
That alone should make people think – that also a knight in a shining white armor can end as blood knight or knight templar. If you do not know what that means, DuckDuckGo-it.
You all overlook the obvious – Vivaldi does not matter.
First, Vivaldi developers are a bit above average app/extensions creation skill level. They modify Chromium a bit too, but avoid as much as possible as they lack C related programming skills.
Second: It is the Progressive web app tech which counts, which enables developers to create a browsing experience beyond what Firefox ever offered.
But sure, someone just needs to make use of Firefox internal PWA implementation to do the same.
Oh wait!
The most advanced creation feature (after XUL) you dialed does not exist but is owned by Google!
Ooops!
@Poorly Researched Heart
And that is so typical for “Progressives”. Point is – Open Source means nothing in the end – as soon as the morals or the Ideology is questionable, this reflects on the product too.
(For example – see the laughable excuse for Mozilla… renaming the term master password :D )
Honestly, the only user groups which are using Firefox these days are activists and so-called Progressives. Even true customization loving power users have moved on, for good reasons.
It also does not matter what the engine is able to do or not – see again, if the mother organization is greedy, selfish, influence hungry, desperate and willing to betray their core user group – aka Mozilla – then honestly, the product itself has the same zero value.
So, Pale Moon, Seamonkey or even Chromium over Mozilla EVERY single time!
Windows 11* typo.
@Sajadi comment “Typical Progressive, nothing more, nothing less. Poorly Researched you are indeed, Biden-zilla cant be taken seriously :D”
If you think i am poorly researched in the points i am making, then believe what you want.
You have resorted to an ad-hominem and your comment carries no weight as you have not responded to any of my points i was making but instead chose to associate a browser with identity politics and you want to imply that Firefox users must be pinnk wig wearing progressives. You are comparing a browser to political ideology, where all i see is just software not connected with politics or any progessive ideology. Firefox is a tool, not a political party lol. I find it hilarious how some users who opt for Brave over Firefox think they are making a political stance LMAO, brave relies on the most progressive corporation known to man GOOGLE (RAINBOW FLAG CENTRAL) for browser code (chromium codebase) and when to implement security updates.
Since you are a google chrome or some chromium based browser user probably? It is you that are closer to progressive politics as that is what google does, promote progressive politics and loads of censorship. I would not expect you to understand that though, because i do not consider people who choose google chromium project type products to be very intelligent in their software choices, but that is just an opinion, use whatever browser you want, i don’t care but i will laugh at how stupid chromium based browsers are when compared to superior options like Firefox, Librewolf or Mullvad browser.
Iron Heart comment “You are still citing Firefox having nominally fewer security issues ”
What i said is backed up with links on legit research based on VulDB vulernability database.
Keep whining on chrome zero day exploit articles defending googles shoddy security and making excuses for them by saying that because their browser is so popular they should not be criticised.
Iron Heart comment “Most operating systems come with a form of Chromium preinstalled anyway, so if anything, installing Firefox adds additional vulnerabilities and widens the attack surface. Why would anyone do that?”
Linux Distros are primarily having Firefox as the default browser with no chromium alternative installed, LMAO @ most. Linux Distros are very popular. Installing chromium based browsers WOULD widen the attack surface hence why linux distro programmers do not implement chromium based browsers as default, chromium is less trusted in the linux community and Firefox is the Go-To.. You just reinforced my point that Firefox is considered the better secure browser in some communities. Lol.
Iron Heart comment “Comparing Brave’s popularity to Firefox’s popularity is pointless”
Brave is a dying browser, no one is using it, much less people using it than Firefox. THAT IS YOUR LOGIC, only flipped around. The difference between me and you though is that i am not in every Brave article saying Brave is dying because it has a lower market share than Firefox. I don’t give a **** about market share of a browser and rather evaluate a browser on its own merits than give a damn about something as meaningless as marketshare. Mcdonalds is ultra popular like chrome too? Is Mcdonalds junk food? Yes. Is chrome a junk garbage browser? Yes.
Firefox is way more popular than Brave btw, you jealous? It seems so. What are you doing exactly? hoarding BAT thinking you will get rich and have a profit? LMAO. Many people actually hate the idea of having crypto features in a browser even if opt-in, they just do not want such sh*t in a browser.
I doubt you will get any richer from hoarding BAT.
Iron Heart comment “Letterboxing is privacy-related” “A unified browser window size means the browser starts up, and is used with, said fixed window size. Nobody does that for obvious reasons, Firefox users don’t do that and Firefox does not start up like this by default”
Yes, Brave lacks privacy features such as that. LMAO if you think this is a useless feature. Mullvad browser starts up by default with a specific fixed window size making users look less unique, so can Firefox and you do not speak for every firefox user btw, you certainly do not speak for me as a firefox user.
Iron Heart comment “Linux can be used for better transparency / accountability but to claim it is more secure because the code is public is a non-sequitur. ”
More eyes on the code = higher potential for less security problems = more secure both in reality and in theory. I would not expect you to understand that because you like to use closed source software, you are either a MAC user or a windows user would be my guess, enjoy being in a walled garden and trusting private corporations to keep your data safe lol.
Governments are migrating to Linux because they consider Windows to be unreliable and a spyware tool.
Many military establishments prefer Linux over every other OS. Most of them decide to do so to avoid contributing to the biggest data breaches statistics.
SOURCE
https://webtribunal.net/blog/linux-statistics/
Open source code is considered more secure by real security professionals, your comment carries no weight, you know nothing about security and privacy, you even think they are different lol. You can not have REAL security if there is no REAL privacy, you fail to understand that and are just naive in your thinking.
Iron Heart comment ” Android has had numerous security issues including kernel exploits.”
Chrome gets tons of zero day exploits and security issues, you do not read statistics. Chrome is the default browser in android and it is bad for security. Chrome should be considered as consistently insecure due to all the security issues it gets frequently.
Iron Heart comment “You make silly comparisons between a desktop Linux distro and vastly differently (and more restrictively) configured Linux servers. Why do you equate them? That’s obviously false. Linux on desktop is not popular at all.”
Not popular for noobs like you sure. But Linux makes your hollywood movies and a lot of governments choose to use LInux for obvious reasons. lol.
Even your beloved Graphene OS is linux based.
90% of Hollywood’s special effects are made on Linux.
SOURCE
https://webtribunal.net/blog/linux-statistics/
Iron Heart comment ” You equate browser extension security with browser security. This is obviously false. ”
I equated google shoddy security in chrome as something that can be compared to the shoddy security in chrome web store where millions downloaded malicious extensions. That would do lots of damage in bloated chrome code with javascript always on by default. Google have consistently poor standards as relates to securing their software such as chrome.
Iron Heart comment “Extension security is being improved with Manifest V3”
You sound like a google spokesperson which is not surpising as i do believe you are a fan of google. In google you trust.
Iron Heart comment “You insinuate that, because Google wrote the majority of the code, that these alternatives are automatically bad, which is stupid and directly against the idea of open source. ”
Google chrome is closed source and not open source and chromium project is always going in a non privacy focused browser direction. Brave no spoof screen size LMAO, i know i am right, google makes it hard for adopters of chromium codebase to push it in a privacy focused direction for anyone wanting to create a privacy focused browser from that chromium codebase. Those are just basic facts and Brave seems more directed to making crypto profits than creating a truly privacy focused browser, they would not have used the chromium codebase if they were really serious about privacy. No spoof screen size etc.
Iron Heart comment “I don’t recommend default Android or Google Chrome or other products that may infringe on user privacy, as those who read my comments here well know.”
You would recommend users to use chrome over Firefox because you hate Firefox that much, i don’t believe otherwise even if you say you would not, you have an irrational hatred of Firefox and it shows. You are also constantly defending and making excuses for google when issues are reported around security, bugs and zero day exploits in the articles here, as if to say that it is not googles fault for shoddy security but rather the fact that chrome is so popular. Just because chrome is popular does not mean it should not be criticized for having weaker security than Firefox. You think that because Firefox is less popular it gets less security issues, that is an erroneous concept as Firefox itself has leaner code, more built on rust and has stronger customizability relating to privacy which enhances not only privacy but also security and especially with extensions that just work better in Firefox.
John G comment ” Android is widely used and it has Linux inside, however you are not “using” technically the core itself, because the core is just what it is and it remains far away from the hands of the unexperienced user. ”
Without the linux kernel, Android would not even exist.
John G comment ” I wonder if some time in the future Windows will have some kind of Linux core inside”
Around the early 2000’s Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer declared “Linux is a cancer.”
A corporation like M$ is the antithesis of the freedom and control a user has when choosing GNU Linux.
Windows 12 now has ads lol. Stallman would likely puke all over his computer if he used win 12, a privacy invasive nightmare.
John G comment “however the whole fact is that if you use Linux and Firefox ESR you will have less chance to put in risk your security and your privacy.”
Many people think that by using closed source software such as apple mac and windows, those corporations will keep you secure and private, LOL but how can it be secure and private if those corporations are gathering huge amounts of data on their users, USERS that sign a EULA consenting to giving away loads of data? I would never consent to or use such a sh*t OS.
Linux distros, many of them send absolutely nothing as they have no interest or intention in gathering peoples data, no EULA, so obviously if you want more security and privacy, never pick windows or any apple OS and always choose open source software. More control and more freedom.
The amount of data people give away to corporationsLIKE M$, Facebook, google and the like is the story of modern times, all that information given away to private corporations. These people obviously must not care about their privacy.
John G comment “Lower numbers are not higher security?”
Well theoretically software can enhance security just by being less popular, however many software is popular like the linux kernel and it gets nowhere near the issues that windows or chrome browser gets, the point i was making is that just because a certain software is popular, it should be no excuse for just sheer shoddy security as in windows or chrome browser. Both closed source, tons of bugs, security issues and users getting a lot of their data sent to google and microsoft. Look at windows 12 now, going in the direction of ads, mandatory online accounts, probably a mandatory retina scan in future windows versions lol.
The naive nature of people plays right into the hands of powerful tech corporations, listen to Gates when he says eat the bugs, he was not joking lol.
@Poorly Researched Heart
It is ALL about ideology. And yes, browsers like Brave, Vivaldi and also adding Pale Moon and Floorp are ALL better than Firefox.
And why? That has a simple reason. They are no sell-out like Mozilla who sold power users and theme creators/add-on creators at version 29 first and 57 finally for trying to absorb Chrome’s user base.
Mozilla left all their morals and ideology in the dust because they have become greedy and wanted to become number one market share wise by becoming “the better Chromium without Blink”
And a developer who sells their ideology and morals is ALWAYS inferior. Say what you want about Chromium – that developers are at least stand their point and are not walking a different road suddenly because they are bitter, jealous and hunger for others success.
But Mozilla did and still does. So they suck. End of discussion.
Some good points at your post, however the whole fact is that if you use Linux and Firefox ESR you will have less chance to put in risk your security and your privacy. Lower numbers are not higher security? It could be a good question, however, which is the real probability to find an user of Linux plus Firefox ESR nowadays? I was the only one of mostly 50 students with both them installed in an old laptop, so you can see how far maybe the absence of a wide range of social “security basis”. There is so enough insecurity all around that I think that hackers don’t do higher disasters because they have no time at all to enter at all the weak systems and weak browsers and all so forth.
This comment was for @Iron Heart, not a TL;DR at all by the way.
I am attempting a TL;DR of your more recent nonsense above:
– You are still citing Firefox having nominally fewer security issues – due to an evident lack of popularity – as proof that it is secure as in base code security. That is false and misleading. The only way you can prove this is by pointing at exploit mitigations which Firefox has but Chromium doesn’t. Good luck with that.
– Most operating systems come with a form of Chromium preinstalled anyway, so if anything, installing Firefox adds additional vulnerabilities and widens the attack surface. Why would anyone do that?
– Comparing Brave’s popularity to Firefox’s popularity is pointless if you want to prove anything regarding security. Brave is based on Chromium, so therefore it is the same as Chromium, which is obviously more popular than Firefox. Singling out Brave here does nothing for your argument.
– Letterboxing is privacy-related and not security-related. It aims to protect the resolution of screens by unifying browser window size. A unified browser window size means the browser starts up, and is used with, said fixed window size. Nobody does that for obvious reasons, Firefox users don’t do that and Firefox does not start up like this by default, as it has practicality issues and is there to protect a low entropy value.
– You still insinuate that the code being public makes a product more secure. News flash, only better code quality(!) does, it being public adds absolutely nothing here. The developer teams at Microsoft or Apple are not small at all. Linux can be used for better transparency / accountability but to claim it is more secure because the code is public is a non-sequitur. This NEVER directly follows from something being open source.
– Android has had numerous security issues including kernel exploits. This again, can and must be attributed to how widely it is used, making it an attractive target. Your insinuation that most Android security issues are due to Chromium being shipped with it, is baseless and false. The browser is naturally attacked often as it interacts as a gateway to the Internet, and yet still, Chromium does not account for the majority of Android security issues.
– You make silly comparisons between a desktop Linux distro and vastly differently (and more restrictively) configured Linux servers. Why do you equate them? That’s obviously false. Linux on desktop is not popular at all.
– You equate browser extension security with browser security. This is obviously false. Chromium is not at fault for you downloading malicious extensions. Extension security is being improved with Manifest V3 but gHacks readers constantly cry about it as it will also affect adblockers.
Then there is some nonsense like me loving Google etc. Again, news flash: Google provides open source software, so therefore degoogled forks of their code will pop up, Brave and GrapheneOS being two notable examples. If I use those, I can still not be OK with Google collecting user data, which is the main issue with them. You insinuate that, because Google wrote the majority of the code, that these alternatives are automatically bad, which is stupid and directly against the idea of open source. If it’s open source, it can be vetted and forked as necessary. I don’t recommend default Android or Google Chrome or other products that may infringe on user privacy, as those who read my comments here well know.
@Poorly Researched Heart
Typical Progressive, nothing more, nothing less. Poorly Researched you are indeed, Biden-zilla cant be taken seriously :D
@Sajadi This Trump supporter again. Go back to reddit.
That was a good joke indeed.
John G. comment “The more the use the more the security issues.”
That idea is a fallacy and when applied to superior written code/software such as the Linux Kernel that is extremely popular and has a better track record as regards to privacy and security than something like software such as Microsoft windows. Android has gotten nowhere near the security issues windows has gotten throughout the years, and there are an estimated 2.5 billion active android users worldwide. Most of the android security problems are because of the garbage browser Chrome than the modified linux kernel used in Android which is very secure and has a strong permission system.
Android is the most popular operating system in the world, with over 2.5 billion active users
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/android-statistics/
The most popular operating system in the world is based on Linux not windows.
Linux is just more secure and trusted due to its FOSS nature.
Every Android smartphone works on the Linux kernel. 75.16% of all smartphones in the world ran on Android in 2018.
All of the top 25 websites in the world are using Linux.
90% of all cloud infrastructure operates on Linux, and practically all the best cloud hosts use it.
96.3% of the world’s top one million servers run on Linux. Only 1.9% use Windows,
90% of Hollywood’s special effects are made on Linux.
Governments are migrating to Linux because they consider Windows to be unreliable and a spyware tool.
Many military establishments prefer Linux over every other OS. Most of them decide to do so to avoid contributing to the biggest data breaches statistics.
SOURCE
https://webtribunal.net/blog/linux-statistics/
Linux is extremely popular, but not as much security issues as windows. This is simply because more eyes on Linux Kernel = better security. Windows is closed source garbage in comparison.
This is what poorly researched people like Iron Heart do not understand, they think that software being popular is an EXCUSE for shoddy security. They blame Chrome security issues on the browser just being POPULAR whilst failing to blame googles shoddy security of their garbage browser chrome and their garbage web store with malicious chrome extensions getting downloaded by the millions. If Firefox was as popular as chrome, i still believe Firefox would have less security problems both as a browser and in their addon extension store.
Malicious Chrome extensions with 75M installs removed from Web Store
Despite his attempts to report the suspicious extensions to Google, they continued to be available to users from the Chrome Web Store.
ttps://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/malicious-chrome-extensions-with-75m-installs-removed-from-web-store/
Better and more secure to use Firefox on android than chrome. Firefox is just a better browser, less security problems and an overall better track record when it comes to security than chrome or any chromium clones. Mozilla addons is also better for extensions and has a better track record for security than chrome web store.
Android security problems relate to chrome browser more than linux kernel, CHROME is just a terrible browser for security on ANY operating system even linux based ones like Android. It is poorly written code and using it with javascript on is nightmarish. Popularity is no excuse for just really poor security/privacy standards and heavily bloated code.
* [Editor: removed, please no personal attacks]
I was talking about browsers only, not about some OS. Android is widely used and it has Linux inside, however you are not “using” technically the core itself, because the core is just what it is and it remains far away from the hands of the unexperienced user. In other words, people do really use a browser or a text editor, or some other apps or any kind of possible software. They barely care about the inner core that makes possible that everything could be working as the system itself. Firefox has less use indeed, so the hackers won’t exploit it more than Chrome it would be, just because the success possibilities are lower in all senses. However I have understood your point of view and I agree that Android/Linux is a better core OS. I wonder if some time in the future Windows will have some kind of Linux core inside, or better enough if Google will buy entire Microsoft and then we can say that we are real spied and so forth.
Iron Heart comment “Same like other people come and choose to spend time under Chromium-related articles despite not using it.”
Those people usually come to those articles to comment on the chrome browser/chromium codebase abysmal security history, they are correct to make fun of such a terrible history of google failing to improve the security in their browser and chromium codebase that google are the progammers of. The people who poke fun at chrome in the articles here are correct to compare it to something as bad as a security threat as adobe flash lol.
Just look at chrome zero day exploit history, that browser is not very secure on a consistent basis, there are just facts that you can not deny without appearing to look stupid, it has too much problems. This is why you spamming dumb aidan (who recommends chrome over Firefox) makes yours and his statements about firefox look so stupid. Firefox on paper and in the real world is just a more secure browser than chrome or any chromium clones, it just makes sense when looking at statistical data. You keep saying proof? proof? The statistical data is the proof buddy and reputable groups already carried out such research. This is what makes dumb aidan look well DUMB!
Google Chrome Is the Least Secure Browser, Report Shows
https://tech.co/news/google-chrome-least-secure-browser
Google Chrome has the most reported vulnerabilities among browsers in 2022
numbers are based on the data provided by the VulDB vulnerability database.
https://atlasvpn.com/blog/google-chrome-is-the-most-vulnerability-ridden-browser-in-2022
These statistics were not just made up, they were based on data from the VulDB vulnerability database.
VulDB vulnerability database = Number one vulnerability management and threat intelligence platform documenting and explaining vulnerabilities since 1970.
Since you are a google fan guy though, you defend google shoddy security CONSTANTLY. No browser gets as much zero day exploits as Chrome and the chromium browsers that rely on google when it comes to the chromium codebase are just as vulnerable, if you think spamming a dumb aidan blog can hide such facts, you are delusional. You should be ridiculing googles shoddy security standards and not making up exuses for them, but you do not, because everyone knows here that you love google.
Iron Heart comment “Except Firefox’s lack of popularity and the lack of interest in hacking it, does not prove it is secure.”
Lack of popularity? Still more popular than Brave and other chromium clones buddy. There is a reason why Firefox and not Brave is installed by default on most Linux Distros. Firefox is more respected in the linux community and by windows power users aswell usually.
Iron Heart comment “Yeah because that’s so practical, as screens are so varied in resolution. Most unique metric ever.”
Letterboxing is a privacy feature you fail to understand as you fail to understand simple privacy and security features that can be good for privacy.
Advertising networks CAN sniff browser features, such as the window size and track users as they resize their browser and move across new URLs and browser tabs.
Letterboxing adds “gray spaces” to the sides of a web page when the user resizes the browser window. Which do not make the user look so unique. Brave users theoretically look far more unique than hardened firefox or mullvad users as Brave has no letterboxing features which would make whatever devices users use brave on look far more unique in theory.
“letterboxing” as seen in Mullvad browser, hardened Firefox, Librewolf, Tor browser CAN mask the window’s real dimensions by keeping the window width and height at multiples of 200px and 100px during the window resize operation WHICH generates the same window dimensions/far less unique for all users– a “gray space” at the top, bottom, left, or right of the current page. WHICH MAKES USERS BLEND IN MORE.
Iron Heart comment “Proof?”
Firefox users have all the proof they need, they laugh and ridicule the multiple security problems that MAINSTREAM browser like chrome gets almost every month and the chromium clones relying on inferior code from google as relates to the chromium project shares many of chromes problems as chrome relies on chromium codebase. Google are talking about putting RUST code in the code, AN INVENTION of MOZILLA and rust has been in Firefox with years lol. Google are miles behind mozilla when it comes to cutting edge tech.
Iron Heart comment “So is Android and yet, stuff like GrapheneOS”
Enjoy contributing to google corporation dominance of the tech world by purchasing their phones, GrapheneOS only works with google products. You are a google fan guy, google pixel fashion accessory in your pocket and crying about firefox users making fun of google chromes abysmal security. you are dedicated when it comes to adoring google lol.
Iron Heart also has not a clue what he is talking about as relates to FOSS and Firefox.
“many eyes make for shallow bugs” = FOSS philosophy. He fails to fully comprehend that many eyes are on the Firefox code and that fact alone theoretically improves Firefox and makes it much more secure than a product like google chrome which is closed source. Using FOSS browsers based on chromium is also not much better, because the code is primarily built by the biggest ad tech company in the world (Google) and that is why letterboxing would be very hard to implement in such code. Chromium codebase is not built with privacy features in mind, look at all the stuff Brave has to remove from chromium codebase to appear as a private browser? LOL. Chromium browsers like Brave are just inferior products compared to Firefox when it comes to privacy and security features as Firefox is more connected with the Tor uplift project and implements features from that project into Firefox as optional features.
For anyone wanting to know why REAL security professionals consider FOSS to be more secure than closed source software, here are are just some examples, no one in the professional tech security world would take a clueless individual like Iron Heart seriously.
“many eyes make for shallow bugs” = FOSS philosophy, the more eyes on the code the higher potential for better security and privacy, this is what clueless individuals like Iron Heart fail to understand.
Iron Heart stupidity and clear lack of knowledge = a comment of his “The code being public means that the code itself is better secured than any proprietary alternative (false, non-sequitur).”
Here are real facts that make him look ridiculous.
Why open source makes enterprises more secure and innovative
The open source community’s collective responsibility for developing and maintaining secure code makes it more securable than proprietary code, not less. With open source not only are there more developers involved in identifying and fixing security issues, but they are eager to advertise their contributions and incentivized to find and fix flaws before going live. The adage that “many eyes make for shallow bugs” really rings true.
https://www.techradar.com/features/why-open-source-makes-enterprises-more-secure-and-innovative
“With open source not only are there more developers involved in identifying and fixing security issues”
Iron Heart thinks a few Google, microsoft, or apple developers and their closed source walled garden can compete with A GIGANTIC FOSS community that is a worldwide phenomenom when it comes to fixing security issues and improving them in FOSS software like Linux and Firefox and other open source projects where as the saying goes “many eyes make for shallow bugs”
Iron Heart just like his stupidity and antics around Firefox, spamming closed source promoter dumb aidan etc, is just really clueless when it comes to these topics.
Firefox is dying? That is Iron Hearts inferiority complex talking, he has been humiliated by firefox users many times now simply due to his clear lack of knowledge on the topic.
Really funny though how he thinks he knows what he is talking about but really does not know much lol.
Looks like the chromeboys randomly picked one again for the usual hollering and cymballing, bringing us back toward the rightful path of the better Internet, free from the evil Addons.
The wise words of a dedicated google fan guy = “Firefox is a dying product and the quality control at large reflects that.”
For someone that claims Firefox is dying, the dude sure spends a lot of his time complaining about Firefox on here with the majority of his posting contained to Firefox articles, arguing with firefox users incessantly and telling them their browser of choice is dying.
Much of his posting is also found in Chromium based browser zero day exploit/terrible security articles/ where he defends google’s abysmal security in the “chromium codebase” and promotes ignorant poorly researched pseudo security guys like madaidan who with the recent news throughout the years around “swiss cheese security holes in rust-free chromium based browsers” has been proven to look like an absolute fool when it comes to his recommendations about security/privacy relating to hardware and software, browsers and what operating systems are most secure in his retarded outdated blog. Windows 12 is now basically full of ads, but he recommended windows OS over linux distro’s on his blog, which shows how stupid he is, anyone who promotes closed source software over FOSS when it comes to security and privacy is a moron and a pseudo security researcher.
If Firefox was dying, cutting edge privacy companies like Mullvad would not be launching their browser using Gecko+Rust code with TOR browser privacy features enabled by default such as letterboxing in about:config amongst other privacy features. Chromium browsers still can not even spoof screen resolution size, Mullvad browser users using VPN’s are much less fingerprintable than people using brave or other chromium browsers, where screen size/resolution are likely all unique because it can not be spoofed like Firefox can do. Mullvad browser users are already in a large crowd and are very blended in when using VPN’s with the mullvad browser. That is far more private than any chromium browser can offer whilst also being far more secure, with very little zero day exploits to worry about than something like browsers using chromium codebase such as the absysmal brave browser with pseudo privacy, still can not spoof screen size lol.
Chromium browsers have serious security issues and their privacy features are lacking because the codebase is primarily built by the biggest ad tech company known to mankind.
Some people prefer to remain delusional though such as Iron Heart and his hero dumb aidan who are very poorly researched when it comes to FOSS and the security software industry.
The more the use the more the security issues. We don’t have equal scenarios to say that Chrome and Firefox are better one than the other because to say that we need an use of 50% each. However, in absence of this data, we only can affirm that the less the use the better the security (in a real world scenario with updated browsers, because we can’t say that IE6 is safe, nobody uses it). And even more if you use the ESR version of Firefox indeed.
> For someone that claims Firefox is dying, the dude sure spends a lot of his time complaining about Firefox on here with the majority of his posting contained to Firefox articles
Same like other people come and choose to spend time under Chromium-related articles despite not using it. One rule for me, one for thee?
> their browser of choice is dying
Because it is. Disagreeing with the numbers is hard.
> madaidan who (…) has been proven to look like an absolute fool when it comes to his recommendations about security/privacy
Except Firefox’s lack of popularity and the lack of interest in hacking it, does not prove it is secure.
> retarded outdated blog
It’s neither of the too.
> anyone who promotes closed source software over FOSS when it comes to security and privacy is a moron and a pseudo security researcher.
The code being public does not mean it’s more secure. That’s a non-sequitur. Linux, similarly to Firefox, is less popular and a less attractive target, but not necessarily more secure.
> companies like Mullvad
…added a pre-made config file and their extension to the browser by default and rebranded it. Can be quickly done with any other too, nice proof right there.
> Chromium browsers still can not even spoof screen resolution size
Yeah because that’s so practical, as screens are so varied in resolution. Most unique metric ever.
Anyway, I don’t remember Firefox starting in letterboxing mode, due to its lack of practicality. So inhowfar does it protect your screen resolution?
> far more secure
Proof? What explot mitigations does it have over Chromium? How is the madaidan article not relevant here, care to refute it?
You can only cite lack of popularity and confuse it for base code security, which is your one trick pony.
> Chromium browsers have serious security issues and their privacy features are lacking because the codebase is primarily built by the biggest ad tech company known to mankind.
So is Android and yet, stuff like GrapheneOS or CalyxOS exists. The beauty of open source in this case.
> Some people prefer to remain delusional though such as Iron Heart and his hero dumb aidan who are very poorly researched when it comes to FOSS and the security software industry.
I don’t think so. Look at your core ideas:
1) Lack of popularity leads to nominally fewer known exploits, which means it can the product in question should labeled “secure” despite issues in the base code (false).
2) The code being public means that the code itself is better secured than any proprietary alternative (false, non-sequitur).
3) The screen resolution, one of the least unique values of all, must be protected so that the browser can be called private, and it’s perhaps even more important than protecting other values (false).
Three instances of you talking out of your behind, I am sure they will reappear in your reply because of course they will. You have nothing else.
Out of technical curiosity, Is it crashing before or after it reports back to Google?
#crash-reporter
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/#crash-reporter
Oh, man! Like every click on the icon. I had to use another browser for two days.
Well that would not have happened if you had used an actual browser in the first place. Firefox is a dying product and the quality control at large reflects that.
@Iron Heart
> Firefox is a dying product and the quality control at large reflects that.
I don’t think so.
“Pale Moon”, which everyone thought was doomed fate to die,
It’s not just stay alive, it’s progressing, and it’s practical enough.
In order to concentrate resources on Firefox, Mozilla carried out restructuring including Thunderbird, but as a result Thunderbird has become active, and Mozilla is also revitalizing like Thunderbird.
Mozilla has streamlined its management and organizational structures for efficiency. In addition, Mozilla is revitalizing our relationship with the community.
I don’t think Mozilla is going to die, I feel like it’s starting to shine like a phoenix.
In “Firefox Release” which adopts rapid release,
The release schedule is specified, and some (peculiar) problems have been factored in.
Those bugs are usually fixed immediately.
If don’t like such glitches, just use the Firefox ESR (extended support version).
@Iron Heart, while FF ESR still exists the FF browser will have long life. However it’s true that after v111 FF has became a little more unstable for my taste. Mozilla solves the big issues quite soon also. By the way I don’t remember a crash with FF ESR yet, as it works like a charm with Ubuntu.
@John G.
That’s because FF ESR is the stable branch lol, the normal one they offer for download is beta code at best. Neither are as solid as other browsers.
@Iron Heart – at this point you’re literally just a hater for the sake of hating – you don’t like firefox, thus just don’t click on the firefox articles?
I use firefox on a variety of older PCs – it handles the web just fine for our needs. I used IE for years when that was functional, then I used chrome for probably close to 6 years, now using firefox – it browses fine, websites aren’t broken unless I break them with adblocker or something.
Saying that firefox is not an “actual browser” is a little ridiculous – it’s clearly a real browser which exists in the physical realm, no need to deny reality m8
@Iron Heart, I agree, my father and my uncle also use the ESR branch as well.
I expected some fixes about the new DNS system, very bad imho, or at least provide some further accurate explanations about their too much pointless possibilities, e.g. like fallback when the secure DNS is not active in one country, because which secure DNS are not active in one possible country while the secure DNS resolving is widely used through the USA servers or even the most closer one? Which could be the probability fo find this scenario in the real world, oh come on? And what about the option to be disconnected when a net tell Firefox not to use the secure DNS anymore at its will? And why to bypass the secure DNS when using a VPN? Just simply why the secure DNS can’t overrule the VPN itself? Insane option to be decided by FF.
What I meant is that a simply icon on the address bar could be more than enough to all people just with the classic method of on/off/automatic with three different colors, red, orange and green. Even a boy could understand this easy method so forth and not give the user an entire Tinypedia of everything related with secure DNSs, that are widely used for expert people the most.
Users can’t stay all day long testing each minute if they are connecting to the secure DNS or not, even if FF tells you, because the faster way to see something is just seeing it. Also sometimes the user maybe would prefer not to connect at all if no secure DNS is available (option maximum = on, just stop making people dizzy). There should be only three scenarios, 1) off, 2) only secure DNS (on) and 3) I feel lucky (automatic), with an icon of three colors. Easiest way ever as a lot of extensions works. That’s why Chrome is too much preferred for a big number of people, because you choose between on and off and that’s all folks! There is no need to construct a theory of secure DNS system happiness inside Firefox, not now not anymore in those times.
“That’s why Chrome is too much preferred for a big number of people, because you choose between on and off and that’s all folks!”
I thought that on the contrary Firefox had made lots of efforts to have a user interface that was a copy of Chrome’s. And I would say that it’s often a very bad idea, like the removal of the dedicated search bar ; sure it may seem simpler to have one rectangle instead of two, but the cost of it was changing the URL bar into a simultaneous keylogger for Google, Cliqz, Mozilla, advertising companies that partner with Mozilla, and so on, and consequently, it’s not a bold move to guess that simplicity was never the motivation for them.
But anyway Chrome is more used mostly not because it’s preferred, but because it’s a default, can’t even be uninstalled, or was installed deceptively.
@Anonymous > “I thought that on the contrary Firefox had made lots of efforts to have a user interface that was a copy of Chrome’s.”
I agree partially, FF has tons of possible tweaks, literally tons of them. All those tweaks need to be applied using the famous about:config option at address bar. However some of the options available at FF user’s interface are bad explained, some are redundant and mostly half of them could be managed with some kind of icons placed at taskbar. And mostly more important, Chrome’s options interface hasn’t changed for years, or just applied little changes. In the other hand Edge changes every version, it’s full of options, like Vivaldi and Brave. Too much options are not attractive for the user, like the infamous former IE11, full of absurd options that nobody never understood in all the life.
No crashes here, it was what we were missing, more crashes, LOL.
‘secure DNS’ is a scam promoted by the sneaky fox corporation. One of those sly gain of function thingies marketed as for your own good.
Garbage Top-list tech scrotes promote the usual backdoored US bad actors like google, opendns (cisco backdoored router people), quad9 (police and government), cloudflare (gov spies) or sneakyfox partners like nextdns who probably are paid to cycle back your info for sneakyfoxHQ to sell on.
It would be more decentralized and harder to harvest if you avoided the honeypots+resellers and just used random isp dns. If you are on a v-pee-n then why-o-why would you want your dns leaked out to your vp-n AND some dodgy third party reseller? der
This is how they get you, they trip you up on just one or a few of the hundreds of sneaky tricks and have everyone arguing over which shiny toggles does what.
@tx, it’s best to stay off the internet since practically everybody does that.
My isp dns? lol, are you kidding? What makes you think they aren’t selling your information, too?
@tx, it’s a scary digital world indeed, starting with Telemetrydows 10/11.
“Firefox stable channel” is nearly as funny as “microsoft windows quality control.
No crashes with FF here, because I stick to ESR.
I do appreciate all the people that update asap and find all the bugs before I update ;)~
+1, just the good and reliable ESR. Always working, always walking ahead.
+1 for ESR. No problem here, as usual.
I am not sure why any normal user would use the “regular” flavour of any given software if there’s an ESR or LTSC equivilent. I’ll take stability over bells-and-whistles any day.
I am on FF ESR edition.
Is there any reason to switch to regular edition?
Thanks.
ESR is really stable for working purposes, no single problem here since four years after installed, using it for my studies and widely used in the pandemic (my online working tool for near everything). In the other hand, the Firefox installed through Microsoft Store seems to be more crash proof than the normal installation. In this way I had a lot of profile issues with normal installation of the regular edition, now none. Two broken profiles in one month are more than enough to think bad about FF profile management. If you want peace just use ESR (my father and my uncle are using it too since 2012 so far).
If you want to try some new/experimental features that may cause some bugs/glitches then use mainstream.
Otherwise if you want a stable, no headache browser then ESR.
Both get security updates at the same time so it’s a non issue on that part.
For me I stick to ESR as I want a stable browser since I contantly use the web in my area of work.
@Martin : off-topic but I wish to bring to your attention the following :
The article title ‘Google is threating privacy-friendly YouTube frontend Invidious’
pointing to [https://www.ghacks.net/2023/06/10/google-is-threating-privacy-friendly-youtube-frontend-invidious/]
appears on [https://www.ghacks.net/] but NOT on [https://www.ghacks.net/page/1/?s=]
I’m aware the s=[EMPTY] url parameter is not aimed to be a homepage replacement yet for those who prefer its display it comes in handy and has always performed flawlessly up to now.
T’was my fault (CSS tweaking).
I haven’t experienced a startup crash be it with Firefox 114.0 or its predecessors.
Considering FF114.0.1 is stated to fix this issue only I’ll skip this update.
We often seem to get these articles about startup crashes with Firefox, but I don’t recall ever experiencing them with Librewolf or Mullvad browser. I wonder if Librewolf and Mullvad catch those issues before they become a problem?
Indeed, and they often mention as well that these crashes (as well as other issues) are experienced by “some users” hence that they are specific to given environments (which are not always mentioned).
No idea about Librewolf and Mullvad browsers which I’ve never tried.
By the way, I’ve updated nevertheless Firefox to 114.0.1 for the sake of countering any doubt. Runs as flawlessly, as fast as always.