![]() 'Saving users from themselves' aside, Both Apple and Microsoft already have a method of exposing advanced options to users that are not available from within the application UI. This seems like a bit of a zero-sum game you could use the same justification to make Watchtower mandatory, make Auto-Lock mandatory, etc etc. Despite being arguably more trustworthy than Mozilla's published binaries, 1Password will not work with this browser I will once again be left storing my 1Password passwords outside of 1Password, or returning to insecure/nonunique passwords, if I want to be certain that I am running trustworthy browser code.Įven leaving all of that aside, the main reason you've given for removing this option is that people who don't know what it's talking about might turn it on & cause trouble for you if their credentials are compromised as a result. Say I follow this process and build my own copy of FF the binaries produced at the end won't be signed by Mozilla and will fail your code signing check. If I'm concerned enough about security that this might be a problem, as with Waterfox I can build my own copy of FF from the public source tree - Mozilla even provide a handy-dandy compilation guide. What makes Mozilla trustworthy? Firefox is fully open-source, but we can't be certain that the public binaries Mozilla provide are unmodified from the public code. My personal browser preference aside, the inability to disable this check doesn't seem to result in a real improvement in security. Either option defeats the entire purpose of using 1Password or its' competitors if the pure manual copy-and-paste option was practical, the browser extension wouldn't need to exist. With the inability to disable the signing check, users of non-mainline browsers are effectively forced to either return to using several complex but not unique passwords, or store copies of their 1Password passwords in Waterfox's password vault. There's a small risk that the developer could choose to intercept my credentials, but the code is open-source - I suspect any such feature would be both hard to find & easily identified - and I can build it myself from the public source tree, ensuring I know exactly what I'm running. Until this change was implemented, I could flip a single setting to make 1Password work with Waterfox. The FF55.0 changes forced a profile fork, so switching back to vanilla Firefox at this stage is a tedious & painful process leaving me with a browser that uses more resources, crashes more often, and removes features I value. Prior to Mozilla's changes in 55.0, FF and WF shared profile information & could be swapped between at will. "Sticking to Firefox for now" isn't an option. It uses less memory, it crashes less often, it runs faster, and it's just generally better. Waterfox is (in my experience and opinion) a massively superior browser to Firefox, especially now as Firefox is dropping support for a number of older incredibly useful extensions (which, in some cases, are simply no longer being developed and thus will never be replaced). The newest construct additionally consists of some fixes for the steadiness, performance and the safety of the browser.I'd like to add something to this if I may (and add my vote for Waterfox support!) ![]() A bug associated to BootstrapLoader was stopping the set up of legacy add-ons akin to TabMixPlus, this has been resolved. It fixes a difficulty that was launched in G4.1.3 (additionally launched final week). Waterfox was up to date to model G4.1.3.1 a couple of days in the past for Windows, macOS and Linux. This sounds just like how Waterfox Classic, which was launched as a separate department final yr, is being maintained. ![]() In different phrases, no new options will probably be added to G4. What does this imply for Waterfox G4?Īll remaining updates for Waterfox G4 will give attention to safety fixes and important bug fixes solely. Hopefully, we’ll see a beta model of the upcoming model quickly. There isn’t any phrase but as to when Waterfox G5 will probably be launched. ![]() Optionally, chances are you’ll select to disable computerized updates fully by switching to the next choices: “Never test for updates.” This is just not advisable as chances are you’ll not get safety updates for the browser.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |