mccr8

8 ms·

61.
by mccr8 6y ago
This happens if another instance of Firefox or an external package manager updates Firefox while you are running Firefox. This can happen if you have installed Firefox via a Linux package manager, or if you are running Firefox with multiple
62.
by mccr8 6y ago
The account used to file that bug has not filed any other bug reports, so it isn't clear to me if they did report the underlying security issue that they found. (Disclaimer: I work on Firefox, but I'm just speaking for myself.)
63.
by mccr8 6y ago
We fix memory leaks when people report them and we can reproduce them. Usually it is due to some combination of particular addons and particular websites, but of course the obscurity of any particular leak doesn't help you if you are h
64.
by mccr8 6y ago
Like dblohm7 said, the issue here is when something besides the currently running instance of Firefox does an update. This can happen with the Linux distro packages or if you open Firefox with multiple profiles at the same time. I know it i
65.
by mccr8 7y ago
In Firefox, if you go to about:memory and click on "Measure", you can get some kind of breakdown of where the memory is being used. I don't know how useful it will be to understand why it is using more memory, but it can be i
66.
by mccr8 7y ago
I think the phrase you may be thinking of is the more poetic "War is the continuation of politics by other means" by Carl von Clausewitz.
67.
by mccr8 7y ago
I could be mistaken, but I think internally reported issues that don't make it to release aren't assigned CVE numbers, which might be what he means by "disclosed". Of course, as you say, we do rate almost all security is
68.
by mccr8 7y ago
This update is fixing the second half of the same exploit.
69.
by mccr8 7y ago
Be aware that running multiple profiles at once can cause issues with updates. One instance can end up updating, which means that the other instance can no longer create new processes, because it is still on the old version, and it gets upd
70.
by mccr8 7y ago
The new version that just came out added a new feature where different channels (Release, Nightly, etc.) have different profiles, and for some people it seems to have not picked the right profile for the channel they use. You can try lookin
71.
by mccr8 7y ago
Microsoft basically shut down the IE team after they beat Netscape, which gave Firefox a chance to produce a better product. Web browsing is so closely tied to Google's core business that they're unlikely to mothball Chrome develo
72.
by mccr8 7y ago
Yes, though they were only necessary on OS X.
73.
by mccr8 7y ago
Doing a full release takes a lot longer, so they presumably decided to use a faster method where possible. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/03/shipping-a-security-update...
74.
by mccr8 8y ago
Yeah, I had the same issue, with the same name on the account. Somebody I know also had this issue, and after a few rounds of back and forth with support they managed to get the bogus account deleted, and I think their plan was to then crea
75.
by mccr8 8y ago
YouTube fixed something a few days after that post. I no longer experience the slowness it was describing in Firefox.
76.
by mccr8 8y ago
Do you have scaled resolution enabled? If so, that sounds like this bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1404042 I think there's been a little bit of progress on that issue, but not much, unfortunately.
77.
by mccr8 8y ago
WebReplay requires recording and replaying a lot of low level system specific stuff, like system calls, IPC traffic, stack, and the heap. The "Porting" section of the linked article talks about this. I think the design is intended
78.
by mccr8 8y ago
The section "Comparison with other projects" in the linked article has a comparison to other replay efforts, including what was done for WebKit. I think WebReplay is lower level than the WebKit work, but higher level than rr, whic
79.
by mccr8 8y ago
That sounds kind of like a known issue with scaled resolution on OSX. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like any progress has been made on it. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1404042
80.
by mccr8 9y ago
I don't know about uBlock Origin (which is what you probably meant) but according to press articles AdBlock Plus gets paid money by Google to not block their ads, which feels at least in the ballpark to what Brave is trying to do.
81.
by mccr8 9y ago
Comparing the number of CVEs is not a good way to compare how vulnerable different browsers are. For instance, I believe that Firefox and maybe Chrome bucket together multiple internally reported vulnerabilities into a single CVE.
82.
by mccr8 9y ago
None of the Firefox Quantum work has looked at power usage, so don't expect any changes on that front.
83.
by mccr8 9y ago
You can't enable them in the release version of Firefox. You'd have to use Nightly, I believe.
84.
by mccr8 9y ago
Safari supports DRM, it just uses FairPlay instead of Widevine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay
85.
by mccr8 9y ago
> How does seeing which sites users use that need Flash drive their decision-making. Either they support Flash, or they don't. I'm not saying I support this proposal or not, but here's an example of why this could be usefu
86.
by mccr8 9y ago
The Tor Browser has some kind of antifingerprinting stuff in it. I don't know how it compares to what Brave does.
87.
by mccr8 9y ago
Some sites, such as YouTube, don't start playing a video until you switch to the tab.
88.
by mccr8 9y ago
> When you start Firefox two times in a row, the dialog "Firefox is already running, please close the running instance" or something like this pops up. This is actually due to shutdown (rather than startup) being too slow. Your
89.
by mccr8 9y ago
Patches for many of these issues have been public already for a few weeks, so waiting another day or two won't cause much additional harm. The CVEs do not contain test cases.
90.
by mccr8 9y ago
Quantum Compositor is just a separate process for GPU stuff. It isn't ported from Servo.

More ›