Firefox for Enterprise Support Forum

All our Firefox browsers (version 99.*, Windows 10 Pro or Enterprise) in the company need around 20 seconds to load a web page when first opened. All other browser functions work fluently from the beginning. Also the slowness only happens after opening and not during further use. Which Firefox is refusing to load I can open other tabs and e.g. do a Google search and then the "slowness timer" starts again (independently if the first tab is closed or stays open) and refuses to do anything on that tab. Once the slownedd period is over all tabs are loaded and no further problem occurs. This issue occurs only when the GPO "URL for Home Page" is applied. But this page is reachable and when Firefox is working it loads within milliseconds. For testing I created a new profile and on the first startup the problem already occurs. And all other startups too. When temporarily removing this one GPO entry it immediately works again fluently. It also doesn't matter what I set as home page (company internal website or some random web page); it is always slow once this setting is in place.

I am an admin of some servers, i modify the proxy settings of firefox in a GPO, and it works, but now ont thing is that users can modify the settings of "No proxy for" in Connection Settings, then add the urls, then users can access to any web site which they want to, is there a method to disable this? thanks.

We downloaded the GPO Templates for AD and looking to customize Firefox.

We would like to disable Forms and Autofill: Autofill addresses Autofill credit cards

Also would like to lock down so they can't reenable if possible.

We would like to do this all through GPOs if possible. I found these in the about:config: extensions.formautofill.addresses.enabled extensions.formautofill.creditCards.enabled

But again want to do through the GPO. Is this possible?

Side note while working on GPOs, I set Exceptions for the popup blocker and they are not showing up in the browser. I also filled out to remove Search Engines but they all still appear in the browsers. These two GPO settings don't appear to be working.

I would like to completely remove the address bar (url bar?) from Firefox 78 64bit. We had to update our Firefox at work and the old way of doing it through the userChrome.css file doesnt seem to work with the newer versions.

I have seen many references to this problem that Mozilla does not seem to want to fix.

I have to log in to my (remote) server regulary using the server IP address - there is not a domain name.

Every time (cookies/history always cleared on exit) it presents the message "Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead" and then have to click advanced then accept the risk. Under previous versions I use, this could be stored so you do not have to go thrugh this process EVERY time on logging in to the server.

Everyone knows you can NOT assign a security certificate to an IP address so why does Mozilla not take this into consideration?

Will they change this in future versions?

Is there a work around (no config changes seem to work or chrome changes)

rgds JR UK

Hi,

i'm running Firefox on +70 Windows 10 PCs in three labs in a university. I've applied a computer configuration GPO with AppAutoUpdate enabled, BackgroundAppUpdate enabled and DisableAppUpdate disabled to my PCs, but it looks like i don't get automatic updates. In my labs i see some workstations have Firefox 108.0.1, but most workstations still have Firefox 107.0.1...

As my users can switch between workstations and labs, this leads to the annoying 'older version' message box when a user worked on a PC which already got the update and later uses another PC which didn't get the update. The users are also forced to create a 'new' profile then, which is quite problematic because of the size of the roaming profiles.

Any hints?

I am trying trying to install the keeper extension via intune but am having trouble with the oma-uri. It looks right to me but I might be missing something. Prior to running this I followed https://mzl.la/3vYAIYT and added the Firefox ADMX. Both run successfully but it does not add the extension. Firefox version 116.0.3

OMA-URI: ./Device/Vendor/MSFT/Policy/Config/Firefox~Policy~firefox~Extensions/ExtensionSettings

String: <enabled/> <data id="ExtensionSettings" value=' {

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": Opps, this may have been a mistake reach out to IT.",
   "install_sources":["about:addons","https://addons.mozilla.org/"],
   "installation_mode": "allowed",
   "allowed_types": ["extension" ,"theme"]
 },
 "KeeperFFStoreExtension@KeeperSecurityInc": {
   "installation_mode": "normal_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/keeper-password-manager/latest.xpi",

"default_area": "navbar"

 },

}'/>

Hello,

I am managing Firefox for a very large organization. We have several extension that we deploy using registry keys and we don't allow users to install additional addons. However, since version 102.3 I noticed some extensions that are present on the machine as .xpi files, but should not install unless a specific application is also present, are also being activated. They are enabled in the add-on manager, the information is present in the "extensions.json" and "extension-preferences.json" files. This should not happen. Is there any way to prevent the activation of these files?

Thank you!

Are these supposed to look different, or am I just doing something wrong? In the image I included here, SanitizeOnShutdown and Preferences look different from FirefoxHome and look incorrect. I removed other policies to make this simpler, but all of the other policies with multiple policy values look just like FirefoxHome. It appears that SanitizeOnShutdown is at least working since my history is indeed getting cleared on shutdown, but I'm unsure whether this actually works when I set these to the settings they should be since they should all be false other than Locked. Am I doing something wrong here or are these two policies supposed to look like that for some reason? Thank you in advance for the help!

``` {

   "policies": {

"DisablePrivateBrowsing": true,

       "SanitizeOnShutdown": {
           "Cache": false,
           "Cookies": false,
           "Downloads": false,
           "FormData": false,
           "History": true,
           "Sessions": false,
           "SiteSettings": false,
           "OfflineApps": false,

"Locked": true

       },
       "FirefoxHome": {
           "TopSites": false,
           "Search": false,
           "SponsoredTopSites": false,
           "Pocket": false,
           "SponsoredPocket": false,
           "Highlights": false,
           "Snippets": false,
           "Locked": true
       }

"Preferences": {

   	    "browser.contentblocking.category": {
   			"Value": "strict",
   			"Status": "locked"
   		},
   		"extensions.htmlaboutaddons.recommendations.enabled": {
   		    "Value": false,
   		    "Status": false
   		}

}

   }

} ```

Hi,

We've GPOs in place for Edge and Chrome that set said browsers on all our Windows endpoints to open downloaded ICA files in Citrix Workspace.

I've imported the firefox.admx and mozilla.admx file along with assocaited .adml files, checked Github, checked through the GPO settings yet cannot figure out how to do the same with Firefox.

Is there a Mozila Firefox for Windows GPO ADMX setting I can use to control the "Firefox>Settings>General>Files and Applications>Applications" section to add "Content type: ica | Action: Use Citrix Workspace"?

Thanking you....

Hello, I have a problem with setting up HTTPs only Mode in my Organization, I read a lot about that, but I dont see the "dom.security.https_only_mode" switch in GPO, we have the newest admx for Firefox. We need that to specific container, but still I dont know how to set it up, even via regedit, or preferences. Can someone describe me when can I set it up ? It could be using json file (which exactly file and how?), registry or just gpo. Regards, M.

I am writing from an enterprise environment and I have been directed to the community page by Mozilla support to seek answers. This approach seems somewhat unreasonable for an enterprise setting and it has led me to consider discontinuing their product within our organization. I had requested support to send me a copy of my previous correspondence as I had forgotten some details, but this request was ignored, which is disappointing.

I am skeptical about receiving the help or answers I need here. If there is a more direct line to Mozilla support, I would greatly appreciate being redirected there.

We are currently using Firefox 121.0 and are attempting to implement the Applied Epic extension. I have updated the ADMX policy.

Originally, the reg key flip I created did work but something has changed since then. See screenshot of this. I followed the guide provided at https://github.com/mozilla/policy-templates/blob/v5.5/docs/index.md, which instructed me to place the registry key in Software\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\Extensions\Install\1. However, the guide did not specify whether this should be in HKLM or HKCU. I tried this instead, and it did not work.

I also attempted to implement the extension via GPO, but this was unsuccessful. I tried the new Extension Management system as well, but to no avail.

Here is the JSON configuration I used: {

 "AppliedEpicExtension@gmail.com": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/file/4143256/applied_epic_extension-3.16.3.xpi"
 }

}

Despite following the guide and trying multiple methods, none of the options seem to work. I would appreciate any guidance on what I might be doing wrong.

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"]}}

I need to set the max TLS version to 1.3 and the min version to 1.2 on my shstems. The max and min TLS versions are set to 4 and 3 by default in about:config. If I use lockPref(“security.tls.version.max”,”3”), it is still 4 in about:config for some reason. If I set the min version to 2, it is still 3. This also doesn’t work if I use “SSLVersionMin”: “tls1.2” how can I fix this issue? Thank you in advance!

This might be a simple question. Does Firefox ESR still supports NTLM v1 ? Can we still add the value "network.negotiate-auth.delegation-uris" in preference. Does that enabled NTLM v1. Is there any document or release notes that states Firefox is disabling this setting from Firefox 78 and later. Some how I am not able to find it in release notes.

We have about 35 versions of firefox running across the enterprise (38 to 91) and I have been tasked to update the EOL dates for all versions we have to help bring things up to speed and know what is/is not supported.

I found this page with release dates (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/releases/) but nothing about when a version has reached it's EOL. Any help would be appreciated.

Hello, from Terminal Servers, it is not possible to browse the Internet via FortiGate's explicit proxy from the Firefox browser, while there is no problem with Chrome or Edge. When the user tries to browse external sites, the proxy sends the error page "You need to authenticate to use this service". It seems that Firefox does not pass user authentication to FortiGate. The proxy authenticates users per session via Kerberos tickets.

Firefox version: 115.5.0esr

I also performed the following settings to pass the Kerberos ticket to the proxy without success: https://people.redhat.com/mikeb/negotiate/

I also noticed that it is not possible to change the "network.negotiate-auth.allow-proxies" setting from "false" to "true." Is this my problem? Is it normal that it cannot be changed?

Attached are the settings.

Thank you in advance.

We use Microsoft MDT for computer deployment. We have been installing the Standard version of Firefox for a long time with no problem. Recently we started using AD GPO Templates to configure firefox. To be able to configure certain settings you need to be running the ESR version. I downloaded the more recent ESR version: 102.12.0esr.msi file.

When deploying machine MDT to install Mozilla firefox I keep getting this error: Application Mozilla Firefox ESR returned an unexpected return code: 1618

This is the only application having issues and this issue only came up since I change the installation file to the ESR version.

This is the install command being used in MDT: msiexec /i "Firefoxesr.msi" /qn /norestart

I am posting here and not with MDT support, as this only started happening when I changed the installation file to the ESR version. Has anybody else had a problem deploying ESR version through MDT? Any help on how to fix?

im tryin to instal firefox in a firm users are non admins, and i distributing from a network server made a json file with som changes and on my test machine is lookin good but on a computer in the firm is startin to act funny creatin "Firefox Privat surfning.lnk" in "C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs" dont wont that changing my homepage settings showing "https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ " dont want that how can i fix that try to google but no help there or is it another installer for enterprises? tryed this "https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/enterprise/#download" no diffrent

Hello, and good day. Some of my employees in our org have been using Mozilla as their preferred browser; however, I am having difficulty deploying or managing the browser to deploy the Torii Extension/add-on.

Torii provided me with this link https://support.toriihq.com/hc/en-us/.../5148326594203-Deploy-the-Firefox-Extension to deploy the extension but still to no avail. Can someone assist me with getting this tested and deployed?

Thank you!