6 ms·
CrashFirefox.com
- zer0rest 11y ago"What were you expecting...? NoScript detected, changing pwn technique. Please wait." nty
- skidoo 11y agoWell that's just mean.
- DigitalSea 11y agoAs a Firefox user I can confirm this does indeed crash Firefox. It however also crashes Chrome to an extent (at least on Windows) you get the aw snap page shortly after it loads. Seems like it just overloads the browser using this technique in the URL: data:text/html,<script>location+=location+'A'.repeat(100000000);</script> - I haven't tested in any other browser, but to me that technique would crash any browser, probably even worse on mobile.
- cozzyd 11y agoHmm, it started using a bunch of CPU and memory, but I kill -9ed it before it actually died by itself.
- windlep 11y agoSeriously, no disclaimer that this will hang Firefox, and will likely lock up a system for 20+ seconds before it will let you kill Firefox (linux)? (Thankfully I run linux in a vmware image, so I can go play a game while waiting for linux to figure out the process went rogue) I didn't realize HN was the new 4chan/8chan. Sigh.
- pki 11y agoThe title is named crash firefox isn't it?
- windlep 11y agoYes, it's not named "lock-up the entire system". I was expecting a segfault, quite disappointed.
- newsvatore 11y agoThere was at least one clue provided by the name of the site...
- windlep 11y agoA crash is not a hang. Firefox never crashed, eventually linux asked if I wanted to kill it, but there was no segfault, no crash.
- andrewchambers 11y agoI don't know what you expected.
- M8 11y agoA big label on the page saying "Not really, FF is rock-solid. Have a nice day HN!"?
- cozzyd 11y agoI just sshed into my computer from my phone to kill firefox, although I probably could have switched to a VT as well.
- windlep 11y agoI continue to be incredibly sad that any OS considers it ok to lock-up the entire UX for a program running amok. Most people would consider such an OS defective, and consider what else is out there, rather than ssh into it. I can't really fault them, I do wonder what is wrong with people making such systems that think this is an acceptable situation.
- cozzyd 11y agoWhen a program aggressively allocates memory, buffers must be flushed back to disk, stuff may need to get moved into swap, etc. I/O bound stuff gets higher priority because... I don't know why... probably the throughput is greater that way, or perhaps it's more urgent. Not sure if there's a solution other than having enough RAM that you are never I/O bound. Perhaps if Linux wasn't so aggressive about caching, it would happen less, but things would be slower overall.
- mijoharas 11y agocontent in case it crashes your browser and you're interested: data:text/html,<script>location+=location+'A'.repeat(100000000);</script>
- zer0rest 11y agothis was posted in 4chin yesterday
- malkia 11y agoGot a crash on Chrome (Linux)
- majke 11y agoNot a bug! The crash is as intended! (at least in chrome) https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=432559 https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=432559
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoIt breaks things, so it's an issue. It may not be one that they intend to fix, but it's still an issue regardless.
- tomohawk 11y agoMy firefox with noscript did not crash
- zcid 11y agoHmm, I haven't checked the code yet, but Firefox 37 on Arch with NoScript crashed for me on a reload. I just got the noscript detection the first time.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoDitto. It did hang for a bit (30s?) when closing the tab, however.
- rsuelzer 11y agoActually, it didn't crash my firefox 40.0a . It asked me eventually if I would like to stop running scripts on this page. Which I did and I am now typing this using the same Firefox instance. Only it now is using 4.6gb of memory. :)
- nunsncustard 11y agoTry running 'curl' on that URL (NQSFW). You can see what it's doing with the loop majke pointed out.
- Mizza 11y agoHung, but eventually recovered on 37. Not really sure what I was expecting.
- Manishearth 11y agoSee also: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=8529794 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=8529794 Context: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1105796 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1105796
- thyrsus 11y agoWhen it detected noscript, it replaced the page with this: <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0">AAAA......... ...as displayed with ^U, except the "AAAA...." wasn't visible until I pasted it in this text box. I'm not sure, but I suspect the length of the AAAAs was growing rapidly. There's a lot of memory and more than one core on this system, so I think I killed the tab, which appeared only as a blank page, before it became too destructive.
- soylentcola 11y agoIt was like knowing the link is a Rickroll and clicking on it anyway... Did indeed crash Firefox 37.0.1.