Reviews for Firefox Multi-Account Containers
Firefox Multi-Account Containers by Mozilla Firefox
Review by Amazing Mr. X
Rated 2 out of 5
by Amazing Mr. X, aasta tagasiThis has a lot of potential, but it's not quite ready for prime time. There's a few specific problems here:
Firstly, add-ons can't communicate with the content of containers. This breaks functionality in most add-ons in really weird and unexpected ways. It'd be nice if we could whitelist add-ons to have access to relevant containers, but most users would probably want all of their add-ons to have full access to all of their containers by default and wouldn't expect them to be functionally blocked as they are.
Secondly, containers don't nicely handle redirects. A lot of sites, especially corporate ones, will redirect through several different domains and subdomains when performing the login process. Containers set to "Limit to Designated Sites" won't operate correctly with these redirects as the redirect pages are not true web pages and don't allow you to sit on them long enough to click the address bar button to always open them in the specified container. This cannot currently be remedied by having foreknowledge of the complete list of redirect sites, as the "Limit to Designated Sites" list cannot be manually edited or appended outside of the limited address bar button method.
Thirdly, The VPN integration isn't particularly secure in premise. Being a per-container opt-in means that entities snooping on the line will immediately see that there's something suspiciously different in the data packets coming from your protected containers compared to the rest of your typical https encrypted traffic. This makes isolating these packets, on the fly, infuriatingly trivial. Making this a per-container opt-out would all but eliminate this problem, as attackers would have to have foreknowledge of the originating container to do this effectively in all circumstances. It'd also be great to see connection protocol options ( OpenVPN, WireGuard, etc. ) as well as other VPN provider options as that'd make it that much harder to try and figure out what's going on in the encrypted container traffic and would better protect Mozilla VPN itself. Right now it's technically more secure to not use the VPN feature at all.
I think the basic idea here is really excellent, but these problems really do drag it down. Something made and maintained by Mozilla shouldn't have this many problems. I still think this is potentially useful to certain technical professionals trying to isolate their sensitive internal sites from other web apps, but the average user is going to have too many headaches to be able to use this effectively.
If you know what you're doing, keep the above points in-mind and go ahead and give it a try.
Anyone else? Hope Mozilla addresses some of these issues in a future release. I'll update my review if they do.
Firstly, add-ons can't communicate with the content of containers. This breaks functionality in most add-ons in really weird and unexpected ways. It'd be nice if we could whitelist add-ons to have access to relevant containers, but most users would probably want all of their add-ons to have full access to all of their containers by default and wouldn't expect them to be functionally blocked as they are.
Secondly, containers don't nicely handle redirects. A lot of sites, especially corporate ones, will redirect through several different domains and subdomains when performing the login process. Containers set to "Limit to Designated Sites" won't operate correctly with these redirects as the redirect pages are not true web pages and don't allow you to sit on them long enough to click the address bar button to always open them in the specified container. This cannot currently be remedied by having foreknowledge of the complete list of redirect sites, as the "Limit to Designated Sites" list cannot be manually edited or appended outside of the limited address bar button method.
Thirdly, The VPN integration isn't particularly secure in premise. Being a per-container opt-in means that entities snooping on the line will immediately see that there's something suspiciously different in the data packets coming from your protected containers compared to the rest of your typical https encrypted traffic. This makes isolating these packets, on the fly, infuriatingly trivial. Making this a per-container opt-out would all but eliminate this problem, as attackers would have to have foreknowledge of the originating container to do this effectively in all circumstances. It'd also be great to see connection protocol options ( OpenVPN, WireGuard, etc. ) as well as other VPN provider options as that'd make it that much harder to try and figure out what's going on in the encrypted container traffic and would better protect Mozilla VPN itself. Right now it's technically more secure to not use the VPN feature at all.
I think the basic idea here is really excellent, but these problems really do drag it down. Something made and maintained by Mozilla shouldn't have this many problems. I still think this is potentially useful to certain technical professionals trying to isolate their sensitive internal sites from other web apps, but the average user is going to have too many headaches to be able to use this effectively.
If you know what you're doing, keep the above points in-mind and go ahead and give it a try.
Anyone else? Hope Mozilla addresses some of these issues in a future release. I'll update my review if they do.
6800 reviews
- Rated 5 out of 5by AJLobo, tund aega tagasiOne of the most useful extensions for Firefox. All of your internet usage should be compartmentalized.
- Rated 5 out of 5by mbartine, 4 tundi tagasiWorks as advertised. I have 6 different email accounts for personal and business accounts and it's been a pain to have them all available without interfering with each other. Containers works great to keep them separate. I added in Simple Tab Groups to gain a little more functionality and they work well together.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Benno Rodehack, 10 tundi tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Igor S, 16 tundi tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Madhu Bhargav, 2 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Leland359, 2 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by longlife, 2 päeva tagasi
- Rated 4 out of 5by Firefox user 18142033, 2 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by BananMan, 3 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by ChenXiaoming233, 3 päeva tagasi
- Rated 4 out of 5by あぢまりかむ, 4 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 17109960, 5 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by 𝄃𝄀𝄂𝄀𝄀𝄂𝄂𝄁𝄃𝄀𝄀𝄂𝄃𝄀, 5 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Dawid, 7 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by FFWithUblockOrigin, 7 päeva tagasiCould have better UX but one of the most underrated extensions.
- Rated 5 out of 5by A.R.B., 8 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Mester Imre, 8 päeva tagasiFor some time (Debian, 115.5.0esr) the Google Translate and Google Maps pages do not open in the google container I created, but actually in any container, and only open without using a container. (https://translate.google.hu/ ; https://www.google.hu/maps/) I see this, on new and new pages: Before moving on to Google... | Are you opening this website in the assigned container? continuously and endles. Enhanced Tracking Protection is still the stronger setting. There is no problem with the YouTube page. What is the explanation for this?
-\\-
Update
Today I tried to set the value of privacy.userContext.enabled true to false in the about:config settings, and then I opened the Google Translate and Maps pages without a container (after all, I turned it off). I then set privacy.userContext.enabled back to true and the two web pages now open in the Google container I created. It's fixed the problem. After all that, I set the two websites to always open in this container. I don't know what the cause of the problem was, but I'm glad it's fine now. Cheers up. :)
https://support.mozilla.org/hu/kb/kontenerlapok - Rated 5 out of 5by Taoking, 9 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 17110968, 10 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 15564227, 10 päeva tagasi
- Rated 1 out of 5by Michael, 11 päeva tagasiThis add-on should be good but is knee capped but extremely poor support. The lack of options to manually add sites to the "Always Open In" listing can make it impossible to log into some sites. It NEEDS to have this feature along with wildcard support in the listing.This issue has been known about for over 5 years but is still outstanding.
Would not recommend this plugin to any one - Rated 5 out of 5by Marcel, 11 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 18172883, 11 päeva tagasi
- Rated 5 out of 5by hari, 12 päeva tagasi