பயர்பாக்ஸ் Community Forum

Hello, I think I may have asked about this in the past but cannot recall if I received an answer. Under Settings, I get the message "Your browser is being managed by your organization." This is my home computer and is not being managed by any organization. When I click for more information, it gives me a screen with the following information:

Policy Name Certificates

Policy Value ImportEnterpriseRoots

                         true

If I could get more information on this suspected error, or how to correct it, that would be great. Thanks!

Recently transferred from Chrome. My understanding was Firefox private browsing was supposed to work similarly to chrome incognito mode; once you close the browser, all local files are deleted and cookies are cleared.

However, with Firefox it maintains my logins. If I log into an account while private browsing and the close the browser, I’ll still be logged in next time I go to the website even if it’s days later (and I have never logged into this account in a non-private browsing window!)

I never had this issue using chrome incognito, so it seems to be a Firefox problem.

Is this just not something Firefox supports? Is there any way to prevent storage of cookies and private data?

I wanted to view my full history but that option doesn't show. Using V130.0 464bit Under Privacy and Security I'm showing "Remember History" and the only other thing listed is to "Clear History". No option to view history. Any ideas?

The latest version of Firefox desktop has changed the "custom history" settings lumping forms and history with browsing history and downloads history. Before these were all separate options which was much more useful. How can I get the old menu back?

I don't want to just untick the higher menu "remember search and form history" as I want firefox to remember form and search history during a session - I often have firefox open for several hours at a time. But I do want to know when I close firefox that it will purge form history, but keep browsing and download history.

What is this window called? When this window started popping up a couple of months ago, I noticed a couple of odd things happening on a website I go to. It would not let me pay them. It would look like it was going to then a white screen would pop up ans say" if you see this window then you ...........". I then have to pay on the phone or chrome. I have whitelisted the site but still does it.

The camera won't turn on in the Firefox browser for Google Meet or Zoom. It says it can't find the camera or that it's turned off. I have checked my Windows 11 settings and desktop apps have access to the camera. I have also checked the settings for each of the sites and use of the camera and microphone are allowed. Autoplay is enabled too. The camera works fine in other apps and in other browsers.

If I were to delete my Mozilla account, would I be automatically signed out of both my Mozilla account and my Mozilla Support account across all devices?

Also, when deleting my Mozilla account, is any and all information related to both my Mozilla account and my Mozilla Support account deleted?

I have an answer to a sent email to my firefox "relay" address and cannot find a way to retrieve it from that "relay" email. How do I access that generated email site?

Hi there, in my settings in firefox: there is a website that refuses to go away from the "Manage Data" section of the "Cookies and Site Data" section of my Firefox settings. I will select to remove all of the cookies ever, and even when I refresh the settings page, or close and restart the App, or turn my computer off and on again, it is still there. Strange! I would like assistance with this.

of note, I've checked w/ third party extensions that manage cookies, and that website doesn't show up when I manage cookies via said extension.

I have MacOS Big Sur, 11.7.10. I have the latest version of Firefox.

Thank you!

How would one purge their cookies, search history, tab data while resetting/randomising identifiable information (for example if Firefox were to give each user a serial number or unique tag which it hands to webpages), all without resetting a users a user's browser settings, about:config & browser extensions downloaded (and extension settings). I am using Debian GNU/Linux, so bear in mind that I will be using the most stable version of Firefox on the Debian repos, not the newest version. I do not have a command line phobia, I am willing to do a lot of initial setup & run a specific command every time I launch the browser, even if said command is long. My current system involves rm -rfing the profile on a browser, but this is not optimal because it removes settings & extensions.

Thank you verry much for your assistance, I know this is a large undertaking and it a little overboard on the privacy and security front.

Hi there!

I'm a long time user of Firefox, on and off since roughly 2004.

I just saw the Mozilla blog post about Anthony Enzor-Demeo taking over as Mozilla's CEO this morning and am writing here in an attempt to find a way to reach out to anyone within the Mozilla Foundation regarding the direction the Firefox application has been headed, and try to make myself and similar minds within the Firefox community heard about the changes that Mozilla has made to its policies and direction.

In February 27th of this year, Mozilla changed Firefox's ToS and Privacy Notices to incorporate legally binding policies for the application and strip it of its original privacy-first, open-source nature. This, while not a deterministic factor in how the application operates; illustrates a sudden, outward and hostile stance towards its existing user-base who is most commonly comprised of users dissatisfied with the lack of secure and private browser options available. Personally, I refuse to use Chromium-based web engines wherever possible and Firefox has been my one and only way to break from this "monopoly" of web engines.

Beginning to harvest user data for use by Mozilla and claiming ownership of any user content is immediately a massive breach of trust and contradicts what Mozilla as an organization has stood for since its inception. Going a step further to utilize this data to either be sold to advertisers as an asset, or to be used to train LLM's is exactly what I DON'T want to have happen with my data. I hate that this change happened and it massively reduced my trust in Mozilla and Firefox as a platform.

I never asked for this, Mozilla promised that it would never happen, and now I'm left betrayed by broken promises made with the express intent to turn a profit on my behalf as a user.

In Anthony's blog post, he mentions how AI has reshaped how people search, shop and make decisions in ways that were hard to see or understand. I outwardly disagree with this statement and feel as though AI has "infected" its way through society by brute force, being put in front of every user and shoved in every application. LLM's are not a catchall solution, do not help resolve issues in new and innovative ways, and are massively misused, causing excessive resource usage, gutting consumer markets, and decimating the tech industry by causing excessive amounts of data centers and global tech inventories to be purchased and built with no promise of delivery.

While I may want a fast, modern browser that is honest about what it does- I want that with no obscurity. I want a web engine that is open source, as lightweight and minimal in its design and coding as possible; and with no bureaucracy. I want to know how the engine works, to have the option to review its codebase front to back, to have my data stay as my data on my own local machine without providing it to a third party simply by using an application. Mozilla with its changes since February of this year have removed this as a possibility from their entire application suite.

I don't want AI in my browser- AT ALL. I have disabled it in every capacity that I can (frustratingly too, as these are all enabled by default and FORCE me to provide you my data without express consent.) and with every advancement Mozilla makes towards calling it "the future" and "the focal point", I lose trust. I don't want AI, I want the old privacy policy put back, and I really, well and truly and wholly, DO NOT WANT AI.

I NEVER ASKED FOR THIS, IT'S RUINING OUR LIVES, OUR SOCIETY, OUR PLANET, AND I WANT IT GONE.

Unless Mozilla stops this direction today, I will be seeking out new options, disallowing Firefox usage in any corporate environments within my jurisdiction, and actively informing friends, family and acquaintances of Mozilla and Firefox's fall from grace, and to utilize other user-centric options.

Thank you for your attention, have a great day, and I hope Mozilla can create action that will allow its users to trust it once again.

Hi all,

I have a question regarding the permission requests of the Simple Tab Groups extension by Drive4ik.

As I'm sure many of you know, this extension needs to: This add-on needs to:

• Download files and read and modify the browser’s download history
• Monitor extension usage and manage themes
• Display notifications to you
• Access recently closed tabs
• Hide and show browser tabs
• Access browser tabs
• Store unlimited amount of client-side data
• Access your data for all websites

This add-on may also ask to: Read and modify bookmarks

Theoretically, I find this extension useful but I am concerned about the "Access your data for all websites" requirement. I read through Mozilla's permission request messages for Firefox extensions documentation and it seems like granting this extension these permissions would be a huge risk for the work I do– investigative journalism. It seems like I'll trade organizational benefits for a wider attack surface.

Can anyone speak more about the risks involved with using this extension, the trustworthiness of the developer, and why it needs the "Access your data for all websites" capability?

Thank you.

The only reason I have been using firefox all this time because it does not use ai features and has more trustworthy policies for user data. Given the recent ceo change and his opinions about ai features if it is true and ai is added I will stop using this browser and I know a lot of people will also do it.

After watching this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfY_bNJTBI i went to https://www.cloudflare.com/ssl/encrypted-sni/ and did the test. Result is 3/4. (See screenshot below) Secure DNS, check DNSSEC, check TLS 1.3 check Enrypted SNI, fail In Firefox i tried doing exactly what the person did in the video but i dont have the settings he is showing in about:config Why is that? (Below you can see the screenshot, those settings are missing from about:config)

So my question reamins simple, how can i enable Enrypted SNI in Firefox?

For highly encrypted messages and sensitive information each time renewed or discovered for the first time cam be very intimidating for certain people. Based on the facts and past experiences, this has become extremely important to discuss and share knowledge with true and trustworthy people only to ours and others peace of mind and safety.

So basically, I'm trying to add a 2FA code, homever when I scanned the code using google authenticator, everything went normal. Homever, when I try to put in the code, firefox only lets me put 5 digits but not 6. Any solutions?

I have tried the suggestions as described in the following article: https://support.mozilla.org/bm/questions/1273784 However, am still having the issue. It's as if the settings are totally ignored. I am using version 108.0a1 of Firefox developer edition. Ideally what am trying to achieve is away to disable all features of ETP. I figured setting it to custom with all values unchecked would have done the trick but it's not working. What works is if I add the site to the list of Exceptions for Enhanced Tracking Protection, then I will see all Ads loaded just fine on the page. However, this is not viable for me as I have a large list of sites that I visit, and I need to see the ads on them.

Does anyone know of a way to get around this feature in FF?

Is there another setting am missing from the previous article?