> And worse yet, I was just now told that CF "provide the troubleshooter as a quality-of-life tool and maintain it with best effort." So they aren't even committed to making it work while that was one of the very things that kept coming up in our meeting as it was the only tool remotely available to be able to test Pale Moon (other than testing internally which they seem unwilling to consider, as well) prior to them pushing things to production, so they are already going back on their promises.
> I'm really running out of what little patience I have left with CF. They have effectively not addressed our problems, not provided answers, not told me what behaviour is wrong or broken in Pale Moon (according to them), not provided any tools, and are now playing down the one thing we could use in some fashion as "best effort without commitments", while continuing to be gatekeepers for the Internet and access to large swathes of it. EU's Digital Markets Act is pretty clear about how that is not acceptable behaviour -- even if it was written initially to deal with "preferred bundled software" for operating systems, it does lay the groundwork for addressing unfair practices by other types of gatekeepers like CF.
And the funny thing is that the WebGL context attribute they're asking for is not even the root cause, so implementing it didn't do squat. But it shows the attitude of Cloudflare to the open web: we don't care about mature and stable web standards, or the fact that you don't allow automating your browser by intentionally not implementing WebDriver or Selenium, implement these draft features unrelated to actual bot detection or we will consider your browser a robot and block it.
> My memory list isn’t populated with things Smart Window learned since I enabled it. Oh no.
> It has activity going back months. We’re talking searches and website interactions from long before I enabled this. features.
> Firefox just handed that history to the AI models to plough from, without telling me upfront.
Pretty concerning that Mozilla at this point has made sharing all of your browsing history the default, without even asking you about it. This is a beta version, which is pretty much like a release candidate in Firefox, being the next version to be published after all. This shouldn't have reached beta at all.
I email my dad documents and photos I need printed (and he uses his work office's laser printer). I forward the billing statement I receive monthly from my family's ISP to my mom via email. And I'm "Gen Z"
Sure, "all" operating systems. "All" that is OSes that have a web browser built for it that at least supports [TransformStream](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/TransformSt...)... And the browser and spec written and maintained mostly by people outside of France. Kinda compromises the point of being "sovereign" doesn't it?
> Even after losing server access, attackers maintained credentials to internal services until December 2, 2025, which allowed them to continue redirecting Notepad++ update traffic to malicious servers. The attackers specifically targeted Notepad++ domain with the goal of exploiting insufficient update verification controls that existed in older versions of Notepad++.
Actually JPEG XL is based in part on Google's PIK format. The Zurich team from Google Research (which developed PIK and Brotli) is even actively working on JPEG XL to this day.
The reason why Chrome (also a Google product) removed it at first is more likely to be internal politics. Google is a very large corporation after all, with each faction within it having its own priorities and alignments. In the case of Chrome the team there are probably more aligned with the AVIF/AOM team than with Zurich/PIK when it came to the next-gen image format to be pushed (which would explain why Chrome did not have problems with Brotli, because there wasn't a competing Google faction that is developing a replacement for gzip).
WebExtensions still have them? I thought the move to HTML (for better or worse) would've killed that. Even install.rdf got replaced IIRC so there shouldn't be much traces of XML in the new extensions system...
Simply a consequence of multi-process' inter-process communication (IPC) swamping the task scheduler. Changing the title requires a message to be sent from a content process to the UI through IPC. If you sufficiently flood the IPC protocol with messages, it will bring your browser to a halt in its entirety because you're basically DoSing the browser's internal communications.
Single-process browsers (e.g. Pale Moon) and browsers that have previously been designed primarily with a single-process model in mind and only adopted multi-process later (Firefox, Safari) would've handled this better by at the very least not locking up the browser and eventually the OS with a runaway meltdown in memory allocation.
To test this theory I've forced the Brash code to run with `Brash.run({burstSize: 8000,interval: 1});` in the devtools console. Why the PoC author decided to arbitrarily restrict the running the PoC only to Chrome-based browsers, I don't know. If non-Chrome truly is not vulnerable we should be able to verify that for ourselves.
In a fresh profile of Pale Moon without add-ons (and immediately closing the devtools afterwards) the UI does slow down but it's still usable (and therefore the offending tab can be closed even after a while). If you never reopen devtools in the offending tab the memory never even reaches 1 GB. In the worst-case scenario where the browser would hang (which could happen if you try to open up devtools in the offending tab for example), the memory allocation doesn't get instantly out of control, and the OS will recognize that it's hanging and let you close it.
In Firefox the UI is still working somewhat but memory allocation is faster than Pale Moon (but a bit slower than Chrome). Memory becomes manageable though when you switch focus to another tab; it no longer allocates more memory and the garbage collector was able to free up memory in the offending tab's content process with the JavaScript engine no longer blocking it thanks to the said content process being suspended in the background. However the main UI process will still hold a lot of memory unless you switch back to the offending tab for the garbage collector to recognize it needs to free up memory there. And if you close the offending tab before that you get yourself a memory leak, i.e. the memory allocated by the UI process will never go away, at least until you rerun the Brash code again (where the garbage collector will then recognize there is memory to be freed in the UI process).
I don't know about Safari, I have no Apple device to test it with unfortunately.
And it's not just the WebKit monopoly in iOS, but also being slow on adopting new features pushed by Google. Often even being slower than Mozilla funnily enough. I don't care about what Apple's intentions could be for being a slowpoke on adopting the new features, as long as it allows independent browsers like Pale Moon to catch up with the mainstream.
> And worse yet, I was just now told that CF "provide the troubleshooter as a quality-of-life tool and maintain it with best effort." So they aren't even committed to making it work while that was one of the very things that kept coming up in our meeting as it was the only tool remotely available to be able to test Pale Moon (other than testing internally which they seem unwilling to consider, as well) prior to them pushing things to production, so they are already going back on their promises.
> I'm really running out of what little patience I have left with CF. They have effectively not addressed our problems, not provided answers, not told me what behaviour is wrong or broken in Pale Moon (according to them), not provided any tools, and are now playing down the one thing we could use in some fashion as "best effort without commitments", while continuing to be gatekeepers for the Internet and access to large swathes of it. EU's Digital Markets Act is pretty clear about how that is not acceptable behaviour -- even if it was written initially to deal with "preferred bundled software" for operating systems, it does lay the groundwork for addressing unfair practices by other types of gatekeepers like CF.