You can test first-party isolation now by flipping the about:config pref "privacy.firstparty.isolate" to true. Beware that there are still bugs that break some sites, which is why the feature is not enabled by default yet. If you find bugs, please report them in Bugzilla! Here is the Firefox bug tracking the integration and known bugs:
> Blocking third-party cookies can break some site that rely on third-party resources
Can anyone name sites that require them?
As someone who defaults to deny all cookies and manually enables every one my browser accepts, I don't think I've found a site that requires 3rd-party cookies. Few sites require cookies unless you login or have shopping cart.
Of course, that's anecdotal. Maybe I just don't visit certain categories of sites and don't encounter them.
The other way is to have all StackExchange sites be subdomains of stackexchange.com - which is how the designers of the web intended it to be, I think.
The entire notification center, cross-site hangouts chat, etc all requires third-party cookies.
For anyone else interested: now that I know what to search for, I also found some status at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/FirstPartyIsolation
I'm not sure this description is as clear as you intended.
... so evilcorp.org cookies for evilcorp.org images on A.org will not be set for evilcorp.org images on B.org.
note how every single privacy feature came after google-money. during google-money what did we got? third party cookies accepted as default.
good riddance, google.
I remember, as a volunteer, debating some privacy issue with a Google dev in Bugzilla. They made some crack about looking a gift horse in the mouth, but the discussion was out in the open. I don't recall evidence that Google was influencing Firefox improperly, but OTOH absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ...
You're the one who accuses Mozilla and Google, of different things, sure, but fairly important things anyway.
The burden of proof lies with you. Not us. It is not up to us to "find the pattern."
Not that I disagree with you on the fact that Mozilla seems much better off, post-Google.
* Note that "withdrew" might also mean "offered less money than before because Firefox had less users than before, and Yahoo! offering more.
[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/self-destruct...
* History (Personally, can't live without it). * Whitelist (HN's cookies, for example, I keep). * Saving submitted form data (for auto-complete). * 10-seconds remorse time to reopen that tab and have it stay as it is!
I disabled 3rd party cookies ever since the option appeared in Firefox, and never had any issues.
Sadly, that is currently not possible, not even with addons, because the containers can only be assigned when creating tabs, not when navigating them. There is a related feature (1st party isolation) but that is always-on, so it fails the unless I say otherwise aspect.
I have filed a bug explaining my use-cases [0], but it does not seem to be a priority at the moment. (other addon devs signalling interest might help)
Also if you start a new context every time you navigate you can't for instance log into Google.
That's the point of having an addon API instead of fixed behavior, to implement logic around such complications.
Having special cases for every exception doesn't scale. What about Outlook Web Access using Microsoft accounts or domain accounts? Are you going to build an add on for every webmail installation?
Say site www.a.org includes an image from www.evilcorp.org, and www.evilcorp.org sets a cookie. When I then go to www.b.org and it includes an image from www.evilcorp.org, I don't expect the cookie to be sent back.
In other words, the cookie should be tied to www.a.org, even though it actually came from www.evilcorp.org. It should only be sent if my URL bar says www.a.org AND the image is coming from www.evilcorp.org.
I feel that this is how browsers should have been designed in the first place. I welcome this Container Tabs feature, but I don't think it quite goes far enough to restore my privacy.