• Solved
  • Archived

Certificate problem accessing an internal company website

I am trying to reach an internal company website ([URL]), with a certificate chain rooted in a company certificate authority. This works fine in Chrome, and worked in Fir… (read more)

I am trying to reach an internal company website ([URL]), with a certificate chain rooted in a company certificate authority. This works fine in Chrome, and worked in Firefox on my previous computer. But i recently got a new machine, and something somewhere is not quite right. I get an error message looking like this (between the ~~~s):

~~~ Someone could be trying to impersonate the site and you should not continue.

Web sites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not trust [URL] because its certificate issuer is unknown, the certificate is self-signed, or the server is not sending the correct intermediate certificates.

Error code: SEC_ERROR_UNKNOWN_ISSUER

View Certificate ~~~

If i click on the error code, i get these details:

~~~ [URL]

Peer's Certificate issuer is not recognised.

HTTP Strict Transport Security: false HTTP Public Key Pinning: false

Certificate chain:


BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----

[certificate]


END CERTIFICATE-----
BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----

[certificate]


END CERTIFICATE-----
BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----

[certificate]


END CERTIFICATE-----

~~~

If i click 'View Certificate', i get a chain of three certificates:

  1. Subject common name = [certificate]
  2. Subject common name = [certificate]
  3. Subject common name = [certificate]

If i go to Settings > Privacy & Security > View Certificates > Authorities, i can find both the [certificate] certificates. As far as i can tell, they are identical - i can open the certificate from 'View Certificate' and the corresponding one from the certificate manager and flip between tabs, and all the details are the same.

I am using Firefox 120.0, via a flatpak, on Ubuntu 22. I have given the flatpak access to /etc/ssl/certs, where my company's internal CA certificates are located.

To me, this seems like it should all work. The server has a certificate signed by an internal CA, which is signed by another internal CA, and both those internal CA certificates are in my certificate manager. So what is going wrong? Is there any way i can debug this?

Asked by twic 2 years ago

Answered by Mike Kaply 2 years ago

  • Archived

Firefox crash with message "Gah. Your tab just crashed"

We recently update Firefox with version 138.0 and now getting the message "Gah. Your tab just crashed" when opening the browser. We attempted to update and install vers… (read more)

We recently update Firefox with version 138.0 and now getting the message "Gah. Your tab just crashed" when opening the browser.

We attempted to update and install version 138.0.1 only resulting with the same error. We also found and attempted the following all resulting with the same error: - change the about:config page for settings to false for both browser.tabs.remote.autostart and browser.tabs.remote.autostart.2

- clear browser cache.

- enable Temporary Mode in the Help menu. This appears to fix the problem but only for the current browser session. When a new Firefox window is opened, the error reappears.

What is needed to resolve this error or is there a way to permanently enable Temporary Mode or some similar setting? Thanks for all your help with this.

Asked by marcelo.alejandro 8 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 4 months ago

  • Solved
  • Archived

Application Handlers

Hi All, I have been on the struggle bus lately trying to get the application handlers set properly in our GPO. I am trying to get PDF, webp, avif to open in browser, and… (read more)

Hi All, I have been on the struggle bus lately trying to get the application handlers set properly in our GPO. I am trying to get PDF, webp, avif to open in browser, and jnlp to auto launch Java. Any help will be greatly appreciated!

{"application/pdf":{"action":3,"extensions":["pdf"]},"image/webp":{"action":3,"extensions":["webp"]},"image/avif":{"action":3,"extensions":["avif"]},"application/x-java-jnlp-file":{"action":4,"handlers":[{"name":"javaws.exe","path":"C:\\Program Files (x86)\\Java\\jre-1.8\\bin\\javaws.exe"}],"extensions":["jnlp"]}}

Asked by Chris Wilkerson 1 year ago

Answered by Mike Kaply 1 year ago

Disable Add-ons

How to disable Firefox add-ons in order to block to install temporary extensions. I am generating policies via Firefox Policy generator. { "name": "myconfig", "time":… (read more)

How to disable Firefox add-ons in order to block to install temporary extensions. I am generating policies via Firefox Policy generator. {

 "name": "myconfig",
 "time": "2025-12-14T13:17:27.479Z",
 "configuration": {
   "arrayfields": {},
   "checkboxes": {
     "BlockAboutAddons": true,
     "BlockAboutConfig": true,
     "BlockAboutProfiles": true
   },
   "input": {},
   "textareas": {},
   "select": {}
 }

}

Asked by Kai 1 month ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 1 month ago

Need some clarification regarding the CVEs affecting the Firefox ESR versions.

I would like to know how the Firefox CVEs are affected on its version which are mentioned in NVD. Let take mfsa2025-59, for example CVE-2025-8040, as per the NVD its say… (read more)

I would like to know how the Firefox CVEs are affected on its version which are mentioned in NVD.

Let take mfsa2025-59, for example CVE-2025-8040, as per the NVD its says Firefox ESR < 140.1 is affected so does that mean it affect all the version which are lower than 140.1 which included the ESR 128 and ESR 115 versions or just the ESR 140 version series? then it raise on more question check this cve-2025-8029 in NVD it has specifically mentioned it only affect "Firefox ESR < 128.13, Firefox ESR < 140.1" and not the ESR 115 versions. Could anyone confirm it does not affect the ESR 115 versions or it affect all the versions? Now check this one cve-2025-8027, NVD clearly mentioned "Firefox ESR < 115.26, Firefox ESR < 128.13, Firefox ESR < 140.1" are affected so what I understand is that if the Firefox ESR 115 is vulnerable to any CVE it would be mentioned in the NVD specifically.

My point is that if any Firefox CVEs are listed in NVD and it specify only one version like “Firefox ESR < 140.1” what does that mean? Does it affect all the versions which include ESR 128 and ESR 115 or just the ESR 140 series version only affected? If any CVEs are affected on the ESR 115 and ESR 128 does Mozilla specifically mentioned those versions are affected right? Just like its mentioned in the cve-2025-8027

Any help would be appreciated to clarify this.

Asked by Roger 4 months ago

Last reply by James 2 months ago

  • Solved
  • Archived

Uninstall All Extensions/Add-Ons via Intune

I am trying to manage Firefox for company devices via Intune and would like to know if there is a way to uninstall all extensions/add-ons besides one or two approved ones… (read more)

I am trying to manage Firefox for company devices via Intune and would like to know if there is a way to uninstall all extensions/add-ons besides one or two approved ones.

I have been able to import the Firefox AMDX into Intune and have made a policy to install uBlock (which works without issue) and I can uninstall specific extensions/add-ins via their Extension ID (also without issue), however I can't see a way to uninstall all extensions. If I try and put a wildcard in the Extension ID field, nothing is affected.

We have a large number of devices with their own user-installed extensions so auditing this and then updating a policy manually with specific extension IDs may be quite painful.

Asked by matthew.winter 1 year ago

Answered by matthew.winter 1 year ago

  • Archived

Firefox ESR - Remove/Delete Extension with GroupPolicy

Hi guys, I'm trying to uninstall an extension using a GPO, but it's not working. I've placed a GPO on the user's OU and configured the ID to be removed in the User-Part… (read more)

Hi guys,

I'm trying to uninstall an extension using a GPO, but it's not working.

I've placed a GPO on the user's OU and configured the ID to be removed in the User-Part of that GPO. I previously retrieved the ID using about:debugging.

But nothing happens; the extension isn't removed. (Logoff/Logon/reboot/gpupdate /force .....)

128.11.0esr (64-Bit)

KeePassXC-Browser Extension

The GPOs for Edge and Chrome have the same function. Enter the ID there, and the extension is reliably removed.

Any suggestions? Thanks

Michael

Asked by michael.reiter 6 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 6 months ago

  • Solved
  • Archived

Firefox GPO to add certificate exception

Hello. I know how to define a server certificate exception to avoid browser warnings in case of certificate issue with a website (see attachment). However, I'd like to ap… (read more)

Hello. I know how to define a server certificate exception to avoid browser warnings in case of certificate issue with a website (see attachment). However, I'd like to apply that exception for all users with access to my machine using a GPO (for user or local machine). This is also a requirement in my work where many users run Firefox from a server and the face browser warnings all the time (related to self-signed certificates) so it would be great to apply an exception for all users through a GPO specifying the self-signed certificate warning we want Firefox to ignore. Thanks.

Asked by eltenista10 11 months ago

Answered by Mike Kaply 11 months ago

Group Policy - intl.accept_languages

I previously posted this question: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1495577 Asking how to use the "intl.accept_languages" setting within the JSON for the new … (read more)

I previously posted this question: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1495577

Asking how to use the "intl.accept_languages" setting within the JSON for the new preferences setting within group policy.

A moderator posted this as a comment which I have only just noticed: "The value is a string, so it has to be in quotes "en-GB"" - the post is now too old for me to reply.

I'm still having issues using this setting even after putting the name in quotes. I've tried:

"intl.accept_languages": { "Value": "en-GB", "Status": "user" }

"intl.accept.languages": { "Value": "en-GB", "Status": "user" }

But neither work, please can someone clarify what exactly needs to be used within the JSON?

Asked by NathanH 2 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 1 month ago

Cients and sensitive data. CA Certificate & Web Developer

GNU nano 8.6 /etc/firefox/policies.json { "policies": { "DisableFirefoxStudi… (read more)

GNU nano 8.6 /etc/firefox/policies.json {

 "policies": {
   "DisableFirefoxStudies": true,
   "DisableTelemetry": true,
   "DisableSystemAddonUpdate": true
   "Preferences": {
     "app.normandy.enabled": false,
     "app.shield.optoutstudies.enabled": false,
     "extensions.autoDisableScopes": 15
    }
  }
} Hidden modifications to settings and extensions is absolutely not OK!!!!!!

This is a security environment.

Asked by blake.secure45 2 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 2 months ago

Manage CA cert on android

Hello, I had issue to verify the cert on android app for https://partners-enrichment.heytelecom.be. On Windows I didn't have the same issue. version 144.0.2 / build id … (read more)

Hello,

I had issue to verify the cert on android app for https://partners-enrichment.heytelecom.be. On Windows I didn't have the same issue.

version 144.0.2 / build id 20251027123126 / target arm64-v8a armeabi-v7a x86_64 Device: Samsung S22 / One UI 7.0 / Android version 15 / version S901U1UES8FYI2 / Security patch level September 1, 2025

Error: Secure Connection Failed, because its certificate issuer is unknown, the certificate is self-signed, or the server is not sending the correct intermediate certificates.

CertChain RCA: DigiCert Global Root G2 DCA: DigiCert Global G2 TLS RSA SHA256 2020 CA1 cert: partners-enrichment.heytelecom.be

1) I couldn't check the cert from the gui as on windows. Shield in search bar / Connection not secure doesn't opened the cert. Is it expected?

2) I found this helppage: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/setting-certificate-authorities-firefox

Unfortunately about:preferences isn't available on android (ref. https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/u593x0/how_to_access_to_aboutpreferences_on_android/)

I see in about:certificate which is the correct RCA (I verified the pem file with the root). DigiCert Global Root G2

Where do I check the Intermediate CA's (DCA)?

3) When exporting the RCA it has been download as: digicert-global-root-g2.pem.txt Why the txt at the end?

On Windows it downloads as digicert-global-root-g2.pem

Kind regards,

Asked by Stanislas 2 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 2 months ago

Scap compliance checker scans

I am working on a stig for Mozilla Firefox and I'm trying to do a scap compliance scan but or some reason I am getting a score of zero on all systems. We do patch regula… (read more)

I am working on a stig for Mozilla Firefox and I'm trying to do a scap compliance scan but or some reason I am getting a score of zero on all systems. We do patch regularly and at some point one of the version upgrades caused our compliance scans stopped working. I need a fix and cannot find anything when searching for this issue.

Asked by harry.montoya.ctr 3 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 2 months ago

Broken Auto-Updates on Firefox ESR after silent installation, requires admin privileges, UAC prompts, causes XULRUNNER pop-ups

I've been struggling for months to standardize a deployment of Firefox ESR across various client environments that reliably auto-updates and doesn't cause UAC prompts and… (read more)

I've been struggling for months to standardize a deployment of Firefox ESR across various client environments that reliably auto-updates and doesn't cause UAC prompts and XULRunner profile error pop-ups(I work in IT).

We deploy Firefox ESR in bulk on machines via a batch script which runs as SYSTEM, with msiexec /i and /qn flags.

Firefox installs fine, but then users are typically met with a UAC prompt when they first try to run Firefox. If they decline, then the UAC prompt comes back again next time and often fails to update at all, so the machine is left on an older, vulnerable version.

Regarding the environment: we have deployed the Firefox ESR admx templates and enabled the relevant auto update settings in Group Policy. But only some machines seem to stay up to date, and it seems like this only happens if a user with local administrative privileges has run the program at least once.

What I find unusual is that Firefox seems to attempt to make a "Background Updater" scheduled task for every user that runs the software on each PC, but these users do not have administrative privileges, and the scheduled task is set to only run when that user is logged in. Obviously a scheduled task running as a user with limited privileges isn't going to be able to update files in the Mozilla/Firefox subdirectory in "Program Files" as by default that's read-only access for non-admin users. And, obviously, if a user with local admin privileges DOES log into the machine, then it can update once, but then the scheduled task that it creates for that user (now with admin privileges) will only run when that user logs in - and we don't login as "admin"-privileged users day-to-day.

So, various machines are out of date, running vulnerable Firefox 128 instead of 140 or 142 even though they're all deployed from the same image and have the same policies and restrictions, and ran the same installer for Firefox.

Is there some reason why the auto update scheduled task isn't created at installation time, when administrative privileges have been granted? It's very odd that it doesn't, because then every time a user logs into a machine it seems like Firefox ESR creates the background upgrade task under a non-admin user which simply won't work. I see machines having 4 or 5 background upgrade scheduled tasks, all created by Firefox ESR, and yet the software still won't update - there's a UAC prompt every time the program launches, and going to Help -> About shows "Restart Firefox to update..." but then when clicking the button to restart Firefox, we get the UAC prompt, user doesn't have privileges, so this goes around and around in circles.

Is there a reliable way to keep Firefox up to date without manually logging into each machine and going through the UAC prompts? Can we manually create a scheduled task with the correct user account that has privileges to actually upgrade Firefox?

The background auto update mechanism simply doesn't make sense to our team on a machine-wide install.

Asked by TheITDepartmentAdmin 3 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 1 month ago

What is this? Remote server set to production??

I know nothing about the dev options for Internet settings and minor turned on and it says the remote server is set to production. No flipping idea what this is. Can some… (read more)

I know nothing about the dev options for Internet settings and minor turned on and it says the remote server is set to production. No flipping idea what this is. Can somebody please help me?

Asked by Brooklyn 2 months ago

Last reply by jbr 2 months ago

FF 140.3.1esr (32-bit) - Get PR_CONNECT_RESET_ERROR but Chrome works ok at the same site

Hi, I have 2 machines (Win10 and Win11) with FF 140.3.1esr (32-bit) installed which demonstrates the same failure when I enter one site's url: PR_CONNECT_RESET_ERROR C… (read more)

Hi,

I have 2 machines (Win10 and Win11) with FF 140.3.1esr (32-bit) installed which demonstrates the same failure when I enter one site's url:

PR_CONNECT_RESET_ERROR

Chrome at the same machines goes at this url w/o any failures. Any ideas what to change on "about:config" in FF to allow it opening this url w/o such error?

Asked by senglory 3 months ago

Last reply by Mike Kaply 3 months ago

Authorization Denied with firefox but not with Chrome

I am logged on to my Credit Union and attempt to download my statements. When using Firefox I get the message: {"Errors":["Authorization has been denied for this request.… (read more)

I am logged on to my Credit Union and attempt to download my statements. When using Firefox I get the message: {"Errors":["Authorization has been denied for this request."]}

When I contacted my CU, they said to add an URL to the Manage Exceptions. This worked, but I want to know why Firefox needs this but Chrome doesn't.

Asked by John Spitzer 2 months ago

Last reply by jscher2000 - Support Volunteer 2 months ago