3 ms·

Have you any semblance of proof of this? By the looks of it took Firefox a few years to figure out what the repro was, they reported it to MS, it was (very) pr

Have you any semblance of proof of this? By the looks of it took Firefox a few years to figure out what the repro was, they reported it to MS, it was (very) promptly fixed and they were warned that the syscall they were using isn't being used as intended and they should consider changes to FF for future use cases.

mrb 4y ago
It's the AV that was calling TdhFormatProperty(), not FF. The problem was mostly on the AV side, not FF. FF itself was generating many events due to too many VirtualProtect() calls which in itself was only a smaller part of the problem.
xutopia 4y ago
I've lived through the browser wars and I can tell you that this would not surprise me one bit.
- maccard 4y ago
  There's a difference between something not surprising you and a wild, totally baseless accusation. Ill happily eat my words if there is a shred of proof, but right now it's "company fixes old bug when it was reported to them"
JustSomeNobody 4y ago
>> It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox. > Have you any semblance of proof of this? Does it need proof? Someone can make a statement like this solely based upon past behavior. They're merely stating that it is plausible.
- maccard 4y ago
  > Does it need proof? Yes, it does. Stringing together a narrative and ignoring the proof that contridts your claims is conspiracy theory territory. > Someone can make a statement like this solely based upon past behavior. Yet all the evidence (the bug linked) implies nothing of the sort. > They're merely stating that it is plausible. I can state that it's _plausible_ that the US government conspired with Disney to fake the Moon landing as a show of power to the USSR in the 60's, but I'd expect to be asked for proof, and I'd expect to be accused of spreading absolute nonsense.
gtop3 4y ago
I don't have proof. I'm presenting a theory based on circumstantial evidence. I think it says just as much to reject a theory without proof as it does to present a theory without proof. Let me break down the context in which I make put forward my theory. * Corporate doublespeak is a well documented tactic in which a business will project a message when the truth is the opposite of the message. Sometimes they use euphemisms, ambiguity, or omissions. I am stating that we cannot take Microsoft's press releases about being Open Source friendly at face value. * Five years ago Edge was rebuilt with a chromium backend and Microsoft had a large campaign to increase adoption of Edge. * Reduced Firefox performance would make Edge compare more favorably. This error was clearly in Microsoft's favor. * It is common for companies that own a platform to create advantages for their applications running on the platform. * Microsoft has a long history in the browser wars, highlighted by an antitrust lawsuit in the late 90s. Their anticompetitive behavior regarding browsers was a key part of the lawsuit.
- maccard 4y ago
  > I think it says just as much to reject a theory without proof as it does to present a theory without proof. Except you don't have any proof, and the proof that opposes your wild speculation is: - 5 years ago, a bug was opened on the FF issue tracker that over the years had a bunch of derailments. - A month ago, someone _actually_ investigated, found an issue and reported it to Microsoft. - Issue was promptly fixed You're spreading FUD, and attacking _me_ for asking for proof when you made the accusation in the first place. If you want to discuss this reasonably, I'm happy to, but in order to do that, the slightest modicum of bait that points to any sort of effort is required, meanwhile to someone who has worked on software for a reasonably long time, seeing issues spin like this for years is par for the course, and it's great that someone fixed it.

mrb 4y ago

It's the AV that was calling TdhFormatProperty(), not FF. The problem was mostly on the AV side, not FF. FF itself was generating many events due to too many VirtualProtect() calls which in itself was only a smaller part of the problem.

xutopia 4y ago

I've lived through the browser wars and I can tell you that this would not surprise me one bit.

maccard 4y ago
There's a difference between something not surprising you and a wild, totally baseless accusation. Ill happily eat my words if there is a shred of proof, but right now it's "company fixes old bug when it was reported to them"

JustSomeNobody 4y ago

>> It's plausible that this bug was engineered as an attack on Firefox. > Have you any semblance of proof of this? Does it need proof? Someone can make a statement like this solely based upon past behavior. They're merely stating that it is plausible.

maccard 4y ago
> Does it need proof? Yes, it does. Stringing together a narrative and ignoring the proof that contridts your claims is conspiracy theory territory. > Someone can make a statement like this solely based upon past behavior. Yet all the evidence (the bug linked) implies nothing of the sort. > They're merely stating that it is plausible. I can state that it's _plausible_ that the US government conspired with Disney to fake the Moon landing as a show of power to the USSR in the 60's, but I'd expect to be asked for proof, and I'd expect to be accused of spreading absolute nonsense.

gtop3 4y ago

I don't have proof. I'm presenting a theory based on circumstantial evidence. I think it says just as much to reject a theory without proof as it does to present a theory without proof. Let me break down the context in which I make put forward my theory. * Corporate doublespeak is a well documented tactic in which a business will project a message when the truth is the opposite of the message. Sometimes they use euphemisms, ambiguity, or omissions. I am stating that we cannot take Microsoft's press releases about being Open Source friendly at face value. * Five years ago Edge was rebuilt with a chromium backend and Microsoft had a large campaign to increase adoption of Edge. * Reduced Firefox performance would make Edge compare more favorably. This error was clearly in Microsoft's favor. * It is common for companies that own a platform to create advantages for their applications running on the platform. * Microsoft has a long history in the browser wars, highlighted by an antitrust lawsuit in the late 90s. Their anticompetitive behavior regarding browsers was a key part of the lawsuit.

maccard 4y ago
> I think it says just as much to reject a theory without proof as it does to present a theory without proof. Except you don't have any proof, and the proof that opposes your wild speculation is: - 5 years ago, a bug was opened on the FF issue tracker that over the years had a bunch of derailments. - A month ago, someone _actually_ investigated, found an issue and reported it to Microsoft. - Issue was promptly fixed You're spreading FUD, and attacking _me_ for asking for proof when you made the accusation in the first place. If you want to discuss this reasonably, I'm happy to, but in order to do that, the slightest modicum of bait that points to any sort of effort is required, meanwhile to someone who has worked on software for a reasonably long time, seeing issues spin like this for years is par for the course, and it's great that someone fixed it.