4 ms·

I don't think you understand what you're complaining about. Each browser has had different types of sandboxing. IE's approach is to run the whole process (just

I don't think you understand what you're complaining about. Each browser has had different types of sandboxing. IE's approach is to run the whole process (just the one) in PE mode. Chrome goes a step further and sandboxes each tab to its own process. Safari just sandboxes plugins. Firefox, prior to Electrolysis, sandboxes JavaScript, Media Playback containers, and Plugins. Post Electrolysis it does processes as well.

ygra 10y ago
IE does process isolation too since IE 8, not just relying on low-integrity mode for a single process.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  The IE process has run in protected mode since IE7. In 10 they introduced enhanced protection mode and AppContainer sandboxing. The multiprocess architecture in IE8 isn't an isolation layer as the browser can and does frequently render multiple tabs under the same process. It's not uncommon to hear reports of 40 processes for 2 tabs or 40 tabs for 2 processes.
ryuuchin 10y ago
It's the lack of defense in depth which I would say is disappointing more than anything. Firefox prior to e10s pretty much ran everything save for NPAPI plugins in the same process. Perhaps it is "sandboxed" in the code but in practice I'm not sure you could call it a sandbox from the defense in depth standpoint. Simply running stuff in a separate process doesn't count for much if the separate process is not restricted in any way. When you contrast it with Chrome which uses basically every single operating system mitigation in addition to their sandboxing and the difference really is striking. I'm looking forward to the future of e10s Firefox since it now enables them to move forward with more advanced security mitigations and better defense in depth. I believe Mozilla released a plan for the future of these things which it showed what they wanted to do step by step (e.g. plugins first, etc).
- ianlevesque 10y ago
  > Perhaps it is "sandboxed" in the code but in practice I'm not sure you could call it a sandbox from the defense in depth standpoint. Simply running stuff in a separate process doesn't count for much if the separate process is not restricted in any way. Exactly this.
  - cptskippy 10y ago
    By that definition Chrome is the only browser that sandboxes. But your comment was on how ridiculous it was that Firefox was the only one not doing it. People's hate of Mozilla is very similar and as misguided as their hate for Microsoft and it really shows in your original statement that they can do no right. Instead of a congratulatory "welcome to the club (of one)", it's "why weren't you a member all along?"
    - anon1385 10y ago
      Are you not aware of how Safari works? https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit2 https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit2
      - cptskippy 10y ago
        I am, would you like to clarify whatever point it is that you're trying to make?
        anon1385 10y ago
        Why are you claiming that Safari uses a single process for everything except plugins?
        cptskippy 10y ago
        I was talking about sandboxing. Multi-process rendering is not the same thing and does not intrinsically sandbox an app or make it more secure.
defap 10y ago
> Safari just sandboxes plugins That hasn't been true for at least 5 years. Safari has used a sandboxed, multi-process architecture for Web content since version 5.1.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  My understanding is that kernel level sandboxing in OSX is per application, not per process unless you dispatch XPC services. Does Safari utilize XPC for rendering? If not then the processes aren't sandboxes from on another unless by some mechanism internal to Safari, which is entirely possible. I was referring to the internal sandboxing Safari does to isolate plugins from everything else.
  - defap 10y ago
    > Does Safari utilize XPC for rendering? Web content and plug-in processes are XPC services, yes.

ygra 10y ago

IE does process isolation too since IE 8, not just relying on low-integrity mode for a single process.

cptskippy 10y ago
The IE process has run in protected mode since IE7. In 10 they introduced enhanced protection mode and AppContainer sandboxing. The multiprocess architecture in IE8 isn't an isolation layer as the browser can and does frequently render multiple tabs under the same process. It's not uncommon to hear reports of 40 processes for 2 tabs or 40 tabs for 2 processes.

ryuuchin 10y ago

It's the lack of defense in depth which I would say is disappointing more than anything. Firefox prior to e10s pretty much ran everything save for NPAPI plugins in the same process. Perhaps it is "sandboxed" in the code but in practice I'm not sure you could call it a sandbox from the defense in depth standpoint. Simply running stuff in a separate process doesn't count for much if the separate process is not restricted in any way. When you contrast it with Chrome which uses basically every single operating system mitigation in addition to their sandboxing and the difference really is striking. I'm looking forward to the future of e10s Firefox since it now enables them to move forward with more advanced security mitigations and better defense in depth. I believe Mozilla released a plan for the future of these things which it showed what they wanted to do step by step (e.g. plugins first, etc).

ianlevesque 10y ago
> Perhaps it is "sandboxed" in the code but in practice I'm not sure you could call it a sandbox from the defense in depth standpoint. Simply running stuff in a separate process doesn't count for much if the separate process is not restricted in any way. Exactly this.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  By that definition Chrome is the only browser that sandboxes. But your comment was on how ridiculous it was that Firefox was the only one not doing it. People's hate of Mozilla is very similar and as misguided as their hate for Microsoft and it really shows in your original statement that they can do no right. Instead of a congratulatory "welcome to the club (of one)", it's "why weren't you a member all along?"
  - anon1385 10y ago
    Are you not aware of how Safari works? https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit2 https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit2
    - cptskippy 10y ago
      I am, would you like to clarify whatever point it is that you're trying to make?
      - anon1385 10y ago
        Why are you claiming that Safari uses a single process for everything except plugins?
        cptskippy 10y ago
        I was talking about sandboxing. Multi-process rendering is not the same thing and does not intrinsically sandbox an app or make it more secure.

defap 10y ago

> Safari just sandboxes plugins That hasn't been true for at least 5 years. Safari has used a sandboxed, multi-process architecture for Web content since version 5.1.

cptskippy 10y ago
My understanding is that kernel level sandboxing in OSX is per application, not per process unless you dispatch XPC services. Does Safari utilize XPC for rendering? If not then the processes aren't sandboxes from on another unless by some mechanism internal to Safari, which is entirely possible. I was referring to the internal sandboxing Safari does to isolate plugins from everything else.
- defap 10y ago
  > Does Safari utilize XPC for rendering? Web content and plug-in processes are XPC services, yes.