Forum Bashkësie Firefox për Ndërmarrje

I am reviewing my user.js and pref.js files in anticipation of deploying policy settings in GPO. As a part of the review, I am trying to document what each of the preferences in those files actually do, in order to be able to see in the future why a setting was set the way it was.

I am presently at the preference "pref.browser.language.disable_button.remove". Based on the name of the preference, I would think that if set to true, it would disable the remove button in the Webpage Language Settings window. (Hamburger menu -> Settings -> General -> Language -> Choose your preferred language for displaying pages)

When I set it to true, it does not disable the remove button but when I use the remove button, the preference is set to false.

Am I misunderstanding the purpose of this preference or is there more to using this preference than just setting its value in about:config?

Also, I see there are a number of other preferences that contain disable_button but that only one, "pref.privacy.disable_button.view_passwords", has a GPO policy for setting. I would expect that these preferences containing disable_button would all work in a similar way just each for a different button in the Firefox GUI.

If it matters, I'm running Firefox 115.3.1esr 64-bit en-ca on Windows 10.

Hi there,

We would like to disable ECH on our browsers as it is interfering with our Anti-virus Website blocks. I have identified the settings that need to be changed in about:config and was able to configure 2 of them to be controlled via a registry key but was not able to for another 3 as their keys should be placed in a different Key in the registry. I have searched all over but cannot identify the name for this Key.

The settings I need to manage are in the image. I was able to configure the settings beginning with network.dns but I am not sure how to manage the settings beginning with security.tls.ech

Any help would be much appreciated

I am trying trying to install the keeper extension via intune but am having trouble with the oma-uri. It looks right to me but I might be missing something. Prior to running this I followed https://mzl.la/3vYAIYT and added the Firefox ADMX. Both run successfully but it does not add the extension. Firefox version 116.0.3

OMA-URI: ./Device/Vendor/MSFT/Policy/Config/Firefox~Policy~firefox~Extensions/ExtensionSettings

String: <enabled/> <data id="ExtensionSettings" value=' {

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": Opps, this may have been a mistake reach out to IT.",
   "install_sources":["about:addons","https://addons.mozilla.org/"],
   "installation_mode": "allowed",
   "allowed_types": ["extension" ,"theme"]
 },
 "KeeperFFStoreExtension@KeeperSecurityInc": {
   "installation_mode": "normal_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/keeper-password-manager/latest.xpi",

"default_area": "navbar"

 },

}'/>

I have seen many references to this problem that Mozilla does not seem to want to fix.

I have to log in to my (remote) server regulary using the server IP address - there is not a domain name.

Every time (cookies/history always cleared on exit) it presents the message "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead" and then have to click advanced then accept the risk. Under previous versions I use, this could be stored so you do not have to go thrugh this process EVERY time on logging in to the server.

Everyone knows you can NOT assign a security certificate to an IP address so why does Mozilla not take this into consideration?

Will they change this in future versions?

Is there a work around (no config changes seem to work or chrome changes)

rgds JR UK

Hello I have installed german Firefox Version 117.0 (Build-ID 20230824132758) on Windows 10.

The following ExtensionSettings policy works as expected. The addons ublock and TreeTabs are both installed automatically.

{

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": "My Message",
   "install_sources": ["https://addons.mozilla.org/"],
   "installation_mode": "blocked",
   "allowed_types": ["locale", "extension"]
 },
 "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/ublock-origin/latest.xpi",
   "default_area": "navbar"
 },
 "TreeTabs@jagiello.it": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/tree-tabs/latest.xpi"
 }

}

But I don't want TreeTabs to be installed automatically on all workstations. So I want to change installation_mode to allowed.

{

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": "My Message",
   "install_sources": ["https://addons.mozilla.org/"],
   "installation_mode": "blocked",
   "allowed_types": ["locale", "extension"]
 },
 "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/ublock-origin/latest.xpi",
   "default_area": "navbar"
 },
 "TreeTabs@jagiello.it": {
   "installation_mode": "allowed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/tree-tabs/latest.xpi"
 }

}

But with this setting I'm unable to install it manually from https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/tree-tabs/ The message "An unexpected error occurred during installation." and a popup with the "blocked_install_message" "My Message" is displayed.

The same error occurs without the line (and the comma) "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/tree-tabs/latest.xpi"

I don't know why this does not work. Please help. Thank you.

One of our vendors websites does not load under Firefox ESR, with errors in the console pointing to CSP. Error is: Content Security Policy: The page's settings blocked the loading of a resource at inline ("default-src")

However if I load the site under the normal Firefox release, it displays correctly. When looking at errors in console, it is showing 3 errors for CSP, however it does not stop the site from working correctly. Content-Security-Policy: The page's settings blocked the loading of a resources at https://..... ("connect-src") or ("img-src")

The site is https://app.approvalmax.com If you get the login screen then the site is working otherwise just getting a green background when it is not working.

I am unsure why ESR and RR versions are behaving differently in this case. Using the latest versions of each.

I need to set the max TLS version to 1.3 and the min version to 1.2 on my shstems. The max and min TLS versions are set to 4 and 3 by default in about:config. If I use lockPref(“security.tls.version.max”,”3”), it is still 4 in about:config for some reason. If I set the min version to 2, it is still 3. This also doesn’t work if I use “SSLVersionMin”: “tls1.2” how can I fix this issue? Thank you in advance!

Are these supposed to look different, or am I just doing something wrong? In the image I included here, SanitizeOnShutdown and Preferences look different from FirefoxHome and look incorrect. I removed other policies to make this simpler, but all of the other policies with multiple policy values look just like FirefoxHome. It appears that SanitizeOnShutdown is at least working since my history is indeed getting cleared on shutdown, but I'm unsure whether this actually works when I set these to the settings they should be since they should all be false other than Locked. Am I doing something wrong here or are these two policies supposed to look like that for some reason? Thank you in advance for the help!

``` {

   "policies": {

"DisablePrivateBrowsing": true,

       "SanitizeOnShutdown": {
           "Cache": false,
           "Cookies": false,
           "Downloads": false,
           "FormData": false,
           "History": true,
           "Sessions": false,
           "SiteSettings": false,
           "OfflineApps": false,

"Locked": true

       },
       "FirefoxHome": {
           "TopSites": false,
           "Search": false,
           "SponsoredTopSites": false,
           "Pocket": false,
           "SponsoredPocket": false,
           "Highlights": false,
           "Snippets": false,
           "Locked": true
       }

"Preferences": {

   	    "browser.contentblocking.category": {
   			"Value": "strict",
   			"Status": "locked"
   		},
   		"extensions.htmlaboutaddons.recommendations.enabled": {
   		    "Value": false,
   		    "Status": false
   		}

}

   }

} ```

I am using the intune preview feature which allows you to import admx/adml instead of using the custom injection method. Everything works far better then with the injection method, except for one settings:

ExtensionSettings this setting is working when I have only one setting set (ex):

{"someplugin@test.com": { "installation_mode" : "allowed" }}

If I add a second line to the entry:

{"someotherplugin@test.com":{ "installation_mode" : "allowed"}}

I understand this is a new feature, but if I had the correct format that would work for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings to allow two plugins to work I belive I shouldn't have any issue getting the admx feature to do this, I even tried manually editing the registry setting and it breaks whenever I add the second line to it.

I recently deployed Mozilla Firefox 102.4 ESR here in our environment expecting that when a new version is released Firefox would automatically update on clients computers. Well today I noticed at a new release is out but isn't automatically updating on end users workstations. Does Firefox ESR not automatically update?

Hi All,

I have recently been enhaciing our security posture and have started sorting out our browser extensions, however I seem to be having errors allowing 2 extensions

• 1Password; and
• Firefox Multi Containers.

This is my json:

{ "*": { "blocked_install_message": "version 0.4 - Addon or Extension is not approved. Please submit a ticket to Help Desk if you need access to this extension.", "install_sources": ["https://addons.mozilla.org/"], "installation_mode": "blocked" }, "{bc8367b6-d946-484e-8da6-37691f23ee64}": { "installation_mode": "allowed", "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/1password-x-password-manager/latest.xpi" }, "{2a28e7e4-64c9-4e7f-81fb-0475af840c0f}": { "installation_mode": "allowed", "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/multi-account-containers/latest.xpi" } }

I have tried the obvious and removed the {} from both extensions, however still having troubles.

Is someone able to point me in the right direction?

Version: Firefox ESR 102.9.0 (64-bit) - Windows 10 Enterprise 22H2

Customers have been complaining for about 6 months that they can no longer drag and drop email attachments from Outlook (Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2019 - Exchange) into a Help Desk formula. I tested dragging from Outlook desktop and from the web version.

Drag and Drop works when using Edge and Chrome.

This is not a major issue, since customers can use the other browsers, but since they would prefer to use Firefox, a fix would really be appreciated.  :-)

I figured out that Comcast hijacked all my Firefox bookmarks and moved them to their internet email platform. I still like and will always use Fire-Fox. I today removed all my bookmarks from the Comcast platform that were my Fire Fox bookmarks and only left their one and only email bookmark on Comcast platform. I can only assume this was a per-arranged maneuver and you were aware of this. I sure the long 4th weekend made time for a underhanded switch over for Comcast.

Dear Team, Our application is accessible on Firefox v101.0.1. But recently we have upgraded our desktops with Firefox v112.0.1. The same application accessible on Firefox 101.0.1 is not able to accessible on v112.0.1.

The error code we could see on browser is SEC_ERROR+PKCS11_GENERAL_ERROR. We have already raised a case with HTTP support team but they have suggested to check at browser level. We had also collected traces from firefox but unable to upload the same. Kindly help here at the earliest. Thanks, Shruti Fegade

Good morning,

Can you please answer some questions regarding the Rapid Risk Assessment tool that is available at the following link:

https://infosec.mozilla.org/guidelines/risk/rapid_risk_assessment.html

1. Will any information input into the tool be hosted within the United Kingdom's Servers? 2. Can you please clarify if any information submitted to the RRA toll is retained on your Servers? 3. Is there the option to configure the tool so that no information submitted is retained after the session has terminated.

Kind Regards,

Mark Gormley.

This might be a simple question. Does Firefox ESR still supports NTLM v1 ? Can we still add the value "network.negotiate-auth.delegation-uris" in preference. Does that enabled NTLM v1. Is there any document or release notes that states Firefox is disabling this setting from Firefox 78 and later. Some how I am not able to find it in release notes.

Hello, I am trying to manage Firefox Extension using "Extension Setting" via Intune. Source: https://github.com/mozilla/policy-templates/blob/master/README.md#extensionsettings I am testing below JSON for testing. <enabled/> <data id="ExtensionSettings" value=' {

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": "Not Allowed contact HelpDesk.",
   "install_sources": ["https://www.example.com/*"],
   "installation_mode": "blocked",
   "allowed_types": ["extension"]
 },
 "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/ublock-origin/latest.xpi"
 },
   "https-everywhere@eff.org": {
   "installation_mode": "allowed"
 },
 "jetpack-extension@dashlane.com": {
   "installation_mode": "allowed",
   "install_url": "https://prod.extensions.dashlane.com/downloads/firefox/dashlane-latest-fx.xpi"
 }

}'/>

When deployed to test devices, all extension previously installed get removed and Ublock get installed, seem like working as intended but when I try to install any "Allowed" I get the block installed message. I see no error in "about:policies". I don't know where else to look for why its getting blocked?

Any help will be much appreciated.

We have Firefox rapid-release (not ESR) deployed on Windows 10 across our Enterprise where users do not have local Administrator privileges.

Occasionally the rapid-release updates fail to be installed, with the updater requiring Admin privileges to execute. For example, today a user's Firefox 111.0.1 was asking for elevate to update to 112.0.

The IT team user accounts also are non-admin, but we have not run into this, and judging from the lack of support tickets on this I would say most of our users are not running into this either.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to avoid this, or troubleshoot further?

I work for the local County and we recently got a new content provider that allows for SSL Inspection (Barracuda 410) but it requires a certificate to be installed on every device to work. I am aware of Edge having a way to create a custom installer that would allow us to preinstall the proper certificate, but was wondering if Firefox had the same thing. I am also needing to know that if we push out the version of Firefox with the certificate preinstalled, would it auto import our user's data from their current install of standard Firefox?

Hello,

I am managing Firefox for a very large organization. We have several extension that we deploy using registry keys and we don't allow users to install additional addons. However, since version 102.3 I noticed some extensions that are present on the machine as .xpi files, but should not install unless a specific application is also present, are also being activated. They are enabled in the add-on manager, the information is present in the "extensions.json" and "extension-preferences.json" files. This should not happen. Is there any way to prevent the activation of these files?

Thank you!