News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security.

Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by beaconfield on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @11:59AM (#15705266)
From Peter Bright at Ars: "And security remains a pressing concern, prompting the use of new techniques to protect against exploitation. Some of the rebuilt portions are even using Mozilla's new Rust programming language, which is designed to offer improved security compared to C++.

While today's release represents a major step forward in the browser's performance and reliability, work on Quantum continues. One major weakness of Firefox, relative to Chrome and Edge, is its use of sandboxing and process isolation to limit the impact that security flaws can have. Next year Mozilla will be working to improve these areas. Early next year should also see the rollout of a new GPU-accelerated rendering engine."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by gcp on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @12:32PM (#15705595)
One major weakness of Firefox, relative to Chrome and Edge, is its use of sandboxing and process isolation to limit the impact that security flaws can have. Next year Mozilla will be working to improve these areas.

Firefox has been shipping with a sandbox for a while, let alone e10s. Is that an old post?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by majewsky on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @12:42PM (#15705742)
It is not a binary choice; there are sandboxes and then there are sandboxes. For example, a VM is a stricter sandbox than a container is a stricter sandbox than a chroot is better than nothing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by gcp on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @12:46PM (#15705775)
For sure. But he doesn't go into any details where he think the advantage would lie, which I think conflicts with calling it a "major weakness".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by shmerl on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @12:20PM (#15705468)
> Early next year should also see the rollout of a new GPU-accelerated rendering engine

So what version will get Webrender exactly?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by seba_dos1 on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @12:28PM (#15705552)
59 AFAIK
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by mixedCase on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @01:30PM (#15706358)
Where did you get that info? I'm running Nightly (v59) but it's not enabled by default. Can't find anything on their roadmap either.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by mintplant on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @01:41PM (#15706493)
Version numbers in Nightly should be treated as works in progress, as it's built straight from the working Firefox source tree. When the current cycle ends, the code in Nightly will be bundled up to become the 59 release, and the Nightly version number will tick over to 60. Nightly displaying the 59 version number doesn't mean all features of the 59 release are present there yet.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by geeknik on Saturday November 18, 2017 @07:48PM (#15731595)
For the adventurous:

1) open about:config 2) set gfx.webrender.enabled to true 3) restart Nightly

For the even more adventurous:

1) open about:config 2) set gfx.webrender.enabled to true 3) set gfx.webrendest.enabled to true 4) restart Nightly

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by shmerl on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @02:05PM (#15706756)
In the nightly you need to enable it in about:config. I.e. it ships both Webrender and Gecko engine.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by shmerl on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @01:23PM (#15706259)
Thanks!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Firefox vs. Chrome security by steveklabnik on Wednesday November 15, 2017 @01:26PM (#15706304)
That's a rough guess; the 59 cycle just started, but it's still opt-in, not on by default. But we can say for sure it will be at least 59.
[ Parent | on HN ]