News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Firefox does not have a well-designed privsep model by jchw on Monday June 11, 2018 @03:38PM (#17287774)
Moving a lot of critical code to a memory safe language will be a cool advantage for Firefox, performance benefits aside. That being said, I think it's easy enough to see why Chrome may have a lead given that it indeed was designed to be secure from the get-go. I hope Theo is wrong here, and that things are getting closer, but I guess time will tell.
Re:Firefox does not have a well-designed privsep model by Caspy7 on Monday June 11, 2018 @07:29PM (#17289508)
> I hope Theo is wrong here, and that things are getting closer,

He kind of lost me when he said

> I doubt firefox will ever focus on security.

This just seems ridiculous. They just spent years working Firefox into a multiprocess design, in no small part for security. And the same for completely dropping the entrenched extension legacy model (thereby frustrating lots of devs and users). There are other past and current examples where Mozilla is focusing on and improving security in Firefox.

Re:Firefox does not have a well-designed privsep model by mtgx on Monday June 11, 2018 @03:51PM (#17287897)
Yes, I think rewriting Firefox core components in Rust should give Firefox an edge in some areas, but I still think Mozilla made was wrong to go with its "hybrid" approach for its multi-process architecture.

Perhaps it's a win in the short-term, a win that maybe Firefox desperately needed to catch-up in performance, but they need to slowly transition away from that to a more secure model, as they start fixing other performance issues and fine-tune the browser more.

Re:Firefox does not have a well-designed privsep model by sp332 on Monday June 11, 2018 @06:07PM (#17289054)
I don't know why you're getting downvoted since that's literally their roadmap. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1432593 In addition to separating sites, they're breaking services out into their own processes, like moving all network access to a separate process https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1322426