this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
3 points (51.5% liked)

Firefox

17857 readers
16 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Chrome does not do it either but are we supposed to be the ones that start a new trend or the ones that follow the trend?

I made a post into their feature request section about how important it is for privacy and security. It is perfectly possible to do but they are not interested in doing.

What I asked was that they provide a feature that allows users to opt in to encrypt all browsing data including history, passwords, cookies, etc. With this feature I can only access my browser information after I open up Firefox and provide my encryption password.

How would this help? Well, there could be viruses that can read Firefox browsing history and cookies and send that to the server. With this feature enabled, one can be even more safer.

There is an option to encrypt Passwords. Thats not enough, every other piece of browsing data should also be encrypted.

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 year ago

They refuse to do it because the idea has absolutely no merit to it. If there's a virus on your computer that could steal your data, it can just wait till you unlock that data to steal it. There is zero practical benefit to implementing your suggestion.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago

"full-disk encryption" is the search keyword you're looking for

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

I'm a little confused as to how that would help with privacy/security.

When your browser is open and 'unlocked' a virus could still read the data.

It's the same thing with full disk encryption, if you get a virus on the running system it doesn't matter.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't your computer disk encrypted already?

Otherwise you seem to want jails or sandboxes to protect each app, with access denied by default. That sounds more like Android, or possibly Qubes OS: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubes_OS

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago
  1. its open source, you can submit your patch... if they don't accept it, you can fork it

  2. having a application try to make up for deficiencies of a operating system is a losing battle, better to isolate sensitive data at a container/vm level. i.e. Qubes, you can encrypt all the data at rest, and only unencrypt it when needed.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

To protect it from ... what attack are you stopping here? If you don't know, and it sounds like you don't know, then forget it.

If someone roots your device, you still lose. If someone takes your device while you're browsing, you still lose. If your hard drive is unencrypted, you still lose.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Tired of seeing all these anti Firefox posts lately, especially when they instantly get debunked in the comments (which I am thankful for)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Is a local sandbox not an option for you?

Firejail on linux Sandboxie on windows

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Chrome does lock some of your browser data to the current (windows) account. Which is why all chromium profiles aren't portable. You can't move your profile to another pc.

As for myself, I use an encrypted container for my ff profile. A fully encrypted disk is a better choice though.