Firefox for Enterprise Community Forum

I need to be able to hide the Extensions button from the toolbar. Is there a way to do that outside of the user.js or prefs.js? Preferably I'd like to do this though the policies.json file though I could not find any options for this.

One of our vendors websites does not load under Firefox ESR, with errors in the console pointing to CSP. Error is: Content Security Policy: The page's settings blocked the loading of a resource at inline ("default-src")

However if I load the site under the normal Firefox release, it displays correctly. When looking at errors in console, it is showing 3 errors for CSP, however it does not stop the site from working correctly. Content-Security-Policy: The page's settings blocked the loading of a resources at https://..... ("connect-src") or ("img-src")

The site is https://app.approvalmax.com If you get the login screen then the site is working otherwise just getting a green background when it is not working.

I am unsure why ESR and RR versions are behaving differently in this case. Using the latest versions of each.

Hi All, I want to block traffic on firefox externally for managed devices via Intune, following the import of the ADMX/ADML files into intune.

I have set '\Mozilla\Firefox\Exceptions to blocked websites' to the following

• //*.mydomain.com/*

which works, however, I also want to add hosts that are only resolving on IPs and not DNS. I can add specific IPs if known, but is there a way I can allow IP ranges? Ie

• //10.10.*/* (this doesn't currently work)

Of the included screenshot, only the wildcard for mydomain.com and the specific IP currently work

If there is a better way to do this via intune for firefox only, please let me know.

Thanks

Hi everyone. I have installed Firefox on all windows 10 workstations and I have also installed latest Firefox Group Policy ADMX on Server. I need to set some preferences on all Workstations. The preferences that I want to set are the ones that can be found in about:config.

But the problem is that only some of these preferences exist in Group Policy by default and it says "deprecated". I know that I can add additional about:config preferences in a Group Policy object called "Preferences". But no matter how I enter the format or how I change the JASON file, no preference policy is applied to Firefox in workstations. By the way when I change "Preferences" gpo in group Policy the next Policy called "Preferences (JASON on one file)" does also change. I have thoroughly searched the web and Mozilla support and have tested all suggestions but all to no avail. Can you please help me and Give me an example of how to do that? I would appreciate any answer in advance.

Hello, I am trying to create a deny all & white list only gpo for Firefox extensions.

I am using the gpo; Computer Configuration/Policies/Administrative Templates/Mozilla/Firefox/Extensions/Extension Management

I started out simple using a template which worked.

{ "*": { "blocked_install_message": "Your Company Blocked Message", "installation_mode": "blocked" }, "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": { "installation_mode": "allowed" } }

However, when I tried to add in more allowed extensions it now longer worked and was able to install any extension.

{ "*": { "blocked_install_message": "Your Company Blocked Message", "installation_mode": "blocked" }, "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": { "installation_mode": "allowed" }, "querymoid@kaply.com": { "installation_mode": "allowed" } }

We are working on implementing Firefox for Enterprise and rolling it out through Intune/Company Portal, one challenge we are encountering is that we have disabled Pocket as thoroughly as we can (followed the guide from Mozilla https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/disable-or-re-enable-pocket-for-firefox) and we are still seeing requests go out to "img-getpocket.cdn.mozilla.net" we do not want Pocket available at all, we do not want queries made to those domains, is it not possible to completely eradicate Pocket?

It wouldn't be a problem but our AV solution (MDE) has a popup every time the URL is queried and blocked.

Attached image of our configuration profile for Pocket.

We use Firefox ESR for along time in our organisation but with the last update, a specific page wont redirect to the ADFS page. In the latest normal version of Firefox it works and also other browser but not in ESR.

The webpage is https://rx-base.nl/ and https://preprod.rx-base.nl/

We are using the latest version of ESR. It gives a blank page with in the console a error:

Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: Fout bij het oplossen van modulespecificatie ‘@rxbase/root’. Relatieve modulespecificaties moeten beginnen met ‘./’, ‘../’ of ‘/’.

Please advise on what to do.

Hi All, I want to block traffic on firefox externally for managed devices via Intune, following the import of the ADMX/ADML files into intune.

Having read https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/managing-firefox-intune I have set '\Mozilla\Firefox\Exceptions to blocked websites' to the following; //*.mydomain.com/*

Which works, however, I also want to add hosts that are only resolving on IPs and not DNS. I can add specific IPs if known, but is there a way I can allow IP ranges? Ie

//10.10.*/* (this doesn't currently work) Of the included screenshot, only the wildcard for mydomain.com and the specific IP currently work

I've looked over the link that is recommened in the policy (indirectly) and can't see an option for allowing an IP range. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/Match_patterns

If there is a better way to do this via intune for firefox only, please let me know.

Thanks

When looking at the ExtensionSettings page for Firefox or Chrome they both use an example that shows the registry key Software\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings (REG_MULTI_SZ) being set to a long JSON string with every extension ID and the settings for that particular ID. For example...

{

 "*": {
   "blocked_install_message": "Custom error message.",
   "install_sources": ["https://yourwebsite.com/*"],
   "installation_mode": "blocked",
   "allowed_types": ["extension"]
 },
 "uBlock0@raymondhill.net": {
   "installation_mode": "force_installed",
   "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/ublock-origin/latest.xpi"
 },
 "https-everywhere@eff.org": {
   "installation_mode": "allowed"
 }

}

The problem with this method is that if I am installing an extension, and I overwrite what already exists in Software\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings then all of those other settings get removed. So even if I am a non-malicious actor and just make a mistake with my installer I can easily delete every other extension's settings. Instead what I have to do is during install I have to read the current value of Software\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings and then insert my extension's settings into the JSON blob.

So the examples that Firefox and Chrome provides do of course work, however they do not make very much sense to me. Why would it be formatted this way since all of those are additional key/value pairs and that is exactly what the registry excels at storing. So why put all of those into a single key/value instead of breaking them into multiple?

Additionally breaking them a part into multiple key/value pairs does work! So if instead of the example above I were to split them into multiple key value pairs it works just fine!

Software\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings

   uBlock0@raymondhill.net
       "installation_mode": "force_installed",
       "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/ublock-origin/latest.xpi"

So knowing that this way with multiple key/value pairs works why am I bothering to ask this question at all instead of just doing it the way that makes sense to me? Well the issue is that by breaking it up into multiple key value pairs it actually overrides the other method and makes it so that all those registry settings are ignored. So it doesn't delete them but it still leaves me with nearly the exact same problem.

While I believe "my" way is superior because it uses the registry in a more common sense route, if that is not what the majority of extension developers do then it doesn't matter and I should be conforming to the other way.

As I am typing this question up I did realize just how hard/annoying it is to properly format and make it clear and digestible what the multi key/value format of the registry would look like instead of being a JSON string. So perhaps that is the reason why all the documentation puts it all as one JSON string?

Hi All,

I have recently been enhaciing our security posture and have started sorting out our browser extensions, however I seem to be having errors allowing 2 extensions

• 1Password; and
• Firefox Multi Containers.

This is my json:

{ "*": { "blocked_install_message": "version 0.4 - Addon or Extension is not approved. Please submit a ticket to Help Desk if you need access to this extension.", "install_sources": ["https://addons.mozilla.org/"], "installation_mode": "blocked" }, "{bc8367b6-d946-484e-8da6-37691f23ee64}": { "installation_mode": "allowed", "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/1password-x-password-manager/latest.xpi" }, "{2a28e7e4-64c9-4e7f-81fb-0475af840c0f}": { "installation_mode": "allowed", "install_url": "https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/multi-account-containers/latest.xpi" } }

I have tried the obvious and removed the {} from both extensions, however still having troubles.

Is someone able to point me in the right direction?

I am using the intune preview feature which allows you to import admx/adml instead of using the custom injection method. Everything works far better then with the injection method, except for one settings:

ExtensionSettings this setting is working when I have only one setting set (ex):

{"someplugin@test.com": { "installation_mode" : "allowed" }}

If I add a second line to the entry:

{"someotherplugin@test.com":{ "installation_mode" : "allowed"}}

I understand this is a new feature, but if I had the correct format that would work for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Mozilla\Firefox\ExtensionSettings to allow two plugins to work I belive I shouldn't have any issue getting the admx feature to do this, I even tried manually editing the registry setting and it breaks whenever I add the second line to it.

Hello

I am looking for a way to disable the QUIC protocol in Firefox through Jamf Pro. tried by below value but its not working, anyone did the settings for Mac?

<plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key>Preferences</key> <dict> <key>network.http.http3.enable</key> <dict> <key>Value</key> <false/> <key>Status</key> <string>user</string> </dict> <key>network.http.http3.enable_0rtt</key> <dict> <key>Value</key> <false/> <key>Status</key> <string>user</string> </dict> </dict> </dict> </plist>

Thanks

the settings ExtessionSettings does not show up to be able to modify even tho it is on the ADMX file (5.11)? Should I use the older Extensions policies? I want to install and pin an extension from the store.

In my environment, we have Firefox version 117. Users get this pop up "You must log in to this network before you can access the Internet" (see snip 1) when they launch firefox. In order to get rid of we can toggle this preference setting to TRUE ""network.captive-portal-service.enabled" in the user's browser, which works fine. But i want to control this setting from GPO. I'm unable to find the GPO for the same in the GPO hive for FF. See snip 2 for 'Preferences' related GPOs.

Debian 12 Linux on Dell laptop. Current "updated version" Firefox ESR 128.4.0esr (64bit) I received an update notice for Firefox ESR this morning. After running the Update, I lost the status bar. How can I get it back?

Trying to block www.share365.net but it's not working

{

 "policies": {
     "WebsiteFilter": {
         "Block": [
           "*:share365.net",
           "*:www.share365.net",
           "*://share365.net/*"
         ]
     }
 }

}

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:

[certificate]

[certificate]

[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?

We are looking to mass deploy Firefox x64 for Windows to all staff in our organization, using SCCM. I know you can set a default home page in mozilla.cfg for all users, including future users who don't yet have a profile on the computer Firefox is installed on. Is there a similar option so I can configure Firefox to always show the menu bar for all users? Preferably, another line I can add to mozilla.cfg so that I can easily copy that to all our machines? Thanks.

Firefox version

   128.2.0esr (64-bit)

Operating system

   Windows 10/Windows11 23H2 Septembre patch

Hello everyone,

maybe you can tell me/explain what the problem could be.

In our company we had Firefox version 115.14.0esr (64-bit) and then we updated to 128.2.0esr (64-bit).

Since version 128.2 ESR we have experienced problems in Firefox when trying to access DNN+ pages (with login). https://www.dnn.de/sport/regional/dresdner-sc-denkt-ueber-uebernahme-der-margon-arena-nach-C3IC74MZ6FE43AKGCZJSKUXA3I.html

In Firefox the content is cut off, in Edge it is displayed normally.

With Edge and Firefox 115.14.0esr the page is displayed normally. No AdBlock installed.

In developer mode I see the errors in the versions, so it shouldn't be that.

Cross-source (cross-origin) request blocked: The same-source rule prohibits reading the external resource on https://gum.criteo.com/sid/json?origi...AAAAAAAA&gdpr=1. (Reason: CORS request failed). Status code: (null).

Cross-source (cross-origin) request blocked: The same-source rule prohibits reading the external resource on https://id5-sync.com/api/config/prebid. (Reason: CORS request failed). Status code: (null).

Any ideas? Thank you very much! :)