5 ms·

Temporary Containers is the best extension for Firefox. Every new tab is its own separate container. I configured it so Ctrl + clicking a link will open a tab

Temporary Containers is the best extension for Firefox. Every new tab is its own separate container. I configured it so Ctrl + clicking a link will open a tab in the same container, should I need this for "traditional browsing" where I want to share a session/cookies. Security by isolation - by default. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... PS: There's also a neat one called Proxy Containers to assign separate containers to a different proxy.

nsonha 4y ago
> assign separate containers to a different proxy what VPN provider can you use with this extension?
- nextaccountic 4y ago
  mozilla vpn https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-account-containers-add-on-on-mozilla-vpn/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-accou... which is a rebranded mullvad. mullvad is pretty cool (doesn't require any private info for creating an account or paying, and they recently disabled recurring payments so they don't need to store credit card info, even though this has a financial hit to the company https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-option-to-create-new-subscriptions/ https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-opti...)
- dizhn 4y ago
  I am using it with my own wireguard instance.
  - bjord 4y ago
    how are you binding only specific containers to wireguard?
    - dizhn 4y ago
      I think I should have said "my own proxy" rather than wireguard. I just happen to access it via wireguard. Though I did want to point out that any vpn proxy would work. The Multi Account Containers extension has an Advanced proxy settings at the bottom when you go in to Manager Containers. I have a go based socks proxy running on docker somewhere. I enter the details for that there. Syntax is socks://ip:port . I have two socks implementations installed. I A/B test them sometimes but they seem to be basically equivalent in terms of performance. https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy (old but works fine) Note: If you're using a chromium based browser you can use the excellent SwitchyOmega plugin to do this much easier and with more functionality. No containers of course.
      - commoner 4y ago
        If you want to assign proxy rules without using containers, the Proxy SwitchyOmega add-on is also available for Firefox: - Proxy SwitchyOmega: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/switchyomega/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/switchyomega/ - Source: https://github.com/FelisCatus/SwitchyOmega https://github.com/FelisCatus/SwitchyOmega Another option is the FoxyProxy add-on: - FoxyProxy Standard: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxyproxy-standard/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxyproxy-sta... - Source: https://github.com/foxyproxy/firefox-extension https://github.com/foxyproxy/firefox-extension
        dizhn 4y ago
        Thanks. I didn't know switchy was available for Firefox too. That's great. It must not have come up in my searches. Probably because of its date. I am aware of foxyproxy. It works OK. I was using it until the containers gained proxy support.
ajvs 4y ago
There's no need for this anymore security-wise thanks to First-Party Isolation AKA Total Cookie Protection. Every domain is totally separated.
- thrwawy74 4y ago
  I couldn't enumerate for you all the things isolated to a container; I am no expert. However, I believe first-party isolation only concerns itself with cookies.
  - Saris 4y ago
    IIRC cache is also isolated, I can't seem to find the blog post now, but as I remember mozilla essentially said that temporary containers are replaced by their site isolation.
    - thrwawy74 4y ago
      So FPI would cover the common need, to completely isolate 1 site from another. Containers would still be applicable if you wanted to maintain separate sessions to the same site. Like viewing a site without logging in, and in another tab doing so. I've found this good for webdev of course ~
      - Saris 4y ago
        Yep! I use containers for that, quite handy.

nsonha 4y ago

> assign separate containers to a different proxy what VPN provider can you use with this extension?

nextaccountic 4y ago
mozilla vpn https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-account-containers-add-on-on-mozilla-vpn/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/mozilla-vpn/multi-accou... which is a rebranded mullvad. mullvad is pretty cool (doesn't require any private info for creating an account or paying, and they recently disabled recurring payments so they don't need to store credit card info, even though this has a financial hit to the company https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-option-to-create-new-subscriptions/ https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/6/20/were-removing-the-opti...)
dizhn 4y ago
I am using it with my own wireguard instance.
- bjord 4y ago
  how are you binding only specific containers to wireguard?
  - dizhn 4y ago
    I think I should have said "my own proxy" rather than wireguard. I just happen to access it via wireguard. Though I did want to point out that any vpn proxy would work. The Multi Account Containers extension has an Advanced proxy settings at the bottom when you go in to Manager Containers. I have a go based socks proxy running on docker somewhere. I enter the details for that there. Syntax is socks://ip:port . I have two socks implementations installed. I A/B test them sometimes but they seem to be basically equivalent in terms of performance. https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/net-byte/socks5-server https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy https://github.com/ocassio/go-socks5-proxy (old but works fine) Note: If you're using a chromium based browser you can use the excellent SwitchyOmega plugin to do this much easier and with more functionality. No containers of course.
    - commoner 4y ago
      If you want to assign proxy rules without using containers, the Proxy SwitchyOmega add-on is also available for Firefox: - Proxy SwitchyOmega: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/switchyomega/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/switchyomega/ - Source: https://github.com/FelisCatus/SwitchyOmega https://github.com/FelisCatus/SwitchyOmega Another option is the FoxyProxy add-on: - FoxyProxy Standard: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxyproxy-standard/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxyproxy-sta... - Source: https://github.com/foxyproxy/firefox-extension https://github.com/foxyproxy/firefox-extension
      - dizhn 4y ago
        Thanks. I didn't know switchy was available for Firefox too. That's great. It must not have come up in my searches. Probably because of its date. I am aware of foxyproxy. It works OK. I was using it until the containers gained proxy support.

ajvs 4y ago

There's no need for this anymore security-wise thanks to First-Party Isolation AKA Total Cookie Protection. Every domain is totally separated.

thrwawy74 4y ago
I couldn't enumerate for you all the things isolated to a container; I am no expert. However, I believe first-party isolation only concerns itself with cookies.
- Saris 4y ago
  IIRC cache is also isolated, I can't seem to find the blog post now, but as I remember mozilla essentially said that temporary containers are replaced by their site isolation.
  - thrwawy74 4y ago
    So FPI would cover the common need, to completely isolate 1 site from another. Containers would still be applicable if you wanted to maintain separate sessions to the same site. Like viewing a site without logging in, and in another tab doing so. I've found this good for webdev of course ~
    - Saris 4y ago
      Yep! I use containers for that, quite handy.