upvote
Is there a notable difference between Firefox Enterprise and standard Firefox with group policy management[0]?

[0]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/customizing-firefox-usi...

reply
Sounds like there's additional governance options (notably, SIEM integration) and Enterprise SSO - but I suspect the main benefit from the enterprise pov is going to be the account management and support teams.
reply
Additional features and the option to deploy all supporting services on prem.
reply
From compliance checklist point of view, there may be enough difference. Addressing it is the point.
reply
There are already some controls in place available, but they are often platform-specific (GPOs on Windows, Configuration Profiles on macOS) than can be pushed through Active Directory, Intune, Ivanti, etc, but this does remove some friction and configuration gaps where you can centrally manage those policies in a single location.

You'll still likely need to push something like an enrollment token for Chrome (ex: https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/9301891 ), but then the rest is done through the Firefox Enterprise console.

reply
I thought you could push a non user writable config that could control pretty much everything since... Forever?

Along with that, push extensions to add DLP bits, etc

reply
There is, but the configuration and deployment methods are platform-specific, so you'd need to maintain one set of GPOs, another set of .mobileconfig, etc

Then if you need to change something, you need to change those individally per platform.

With this you can set it up and centrally manage them from a single dashboard, the only thing you need to do is to do the platform-specific enrollment once.

I'm glad Mozilla is trying to find a way to monetize the platform in exchange of providing a tool to better manage the browser at the enterprise level.

reply
Yes, Firefox was already configurable through enterprise policies that an admin could deploy.

Firefox Enterprise tries to remove as much friction there as possible, and adds a pile of features like deployment monitoring, policy changes while running, device posture checks, various security features like SIEM logging, etc.

The other part is that you get the option to run all supporting services entirely on premise, so the browser never has to "phone home" to us, but you still have working updates, sync support, and so on.

reply
The large business I work for cited low usage when they blocked it from being installed a couple of years back.
reply
I work in IT and I am still surprised by how few of us are passionate about what we do.

90% of my colleagues use Microsoft Edge without extensions.

Other browsers are seen as exotic.

reply
I'll tell you a secret: I'm actually using only MS Edge on my corporate machine. Although some months ago they began to roll-out Firefox as well (for whatever reason).

I don't care. On that machine, there is NOTHING going on that I own (all of that is the IP of someone else).

Such a machine, with Windows, MS Teams, MS Whatsoever, Symantec Whatsoever, Cloud Office, Cloud Ticket System, Cloud Wiki, ..., ..., ... doesn't get more trustworthy just by using Firefox. They run a continuous MitM attack against all https connections that I make (and a lot of your employers do the same)!!! You can polish turds, but you cannot make that environment a trustworthy one.

I would never touch that machine for anything remotely "personal". On the other hand, for work, I don't care. I'll use the default browser, and if the default browser is MS Edge, I'll not spend ANY effort into working around it. That wouldn't be "passionate", but just stupid imho. YMMV of course depending on the employer and other factors.

And if there is a page full of ads, and it overwhelms me too much, well, I'll make a walk to the coffee machine and come back when I'm ready for it. It's that easy.

reply
All windows and desktop support folks where I work (bank) still work with File explorer, only it drives me crazy.

I've showed them Total commander and some advanced features, panes and overall speed but no, they all went back to hunting little windows, browsing by clicking, drag and drop hunts and so on.

The obvious inefficiency and their sluggishness when doing anything on filesystem is driving me crazy but I gave up.

reply
I'm a developer and have never considered the need for an alternative file explorer.

Can you please briefly describe the features you think make it worth it?

reply
> Can you please briefly describe the features you think make it worth it?

If we are talking specifically about windows explorer, I think not freezing randomly for no reason once in a while would be considered a nice feature.

reply
Same. I did not know anything like this existed and I've been tinkering with PCs and building them for 3 decades.
reply
Tons of features packed into 1 small integrated, very fast completely bugless tool done by 1 guy - ie sftp client, best recursive search I've used in Windows (including nested archives), I can view and edit files directly in archives (even within archives) without the need to unpack/repack them, great files / folders comparator, viewer for many formats including hex, open plugin support with good ecosystem, 2-pane system with tabs makes everything much faster and you can keep a lot of parallel work around for later, it remembers them after closing/restart, copying / moving queue is fantastic. You can customize everything. I am barely scratching surface with above. In good ol' Winrar style you can use it perpetually for free as shareware (but damn if somebody deserves money for their tool its this guy).

Once proficient I am much much faster than proficient file explorer users, its not even comparable when one does a lot of things with files/folders, personally and profesionally. By far the best windows-only software I am aware of and the one of main reasons I didnt migrate to Linux. Otherwise I would need 10+ additional software installed and some features of it are best in class (on windows at least).

Its good ol' Norton Commander from DOS alive but has gigatons of modern improvements.

reply
mc is the Linux variant
reply
That’s like berating someone for using Notepad instead of Vim.

People don’t care about optimizing every little thing.

reply
Yes but if your work day consisted of only writing text, then using notepad would be torture.

It seems only developers invest time and energy into their tooling and software required to do their job. It would be kind of unthinkable for a developer at a big company to not use some kind of IDE and instead use the OS built-in text editor.

reply
I've met plenty of developers who seem to go too far in the other direction and spend all their time optimizing their tools, and not actually producing anything that anyone else cares about. Reminds me of https://xkcd.com/1205/
reply
> The obvious inefficiency and their sluggishness when doing anything on filesystem is driving me crazy but I gave up.

Would they get a raise if they are more efficient? Or go home earlier? Well, you have your answer here :)

reply
At the very least they would have less work to do.
reply
No one ever has "less work to do". That's why managers exist: to find meaningful or meaningless work to do to fill the time saved, and eventually fire other people in order to ensure no one ever has less work to do.
reply
Lots of people pretend to work more than they do.
reply
That is the inevitable result. As a worker, either you pretend to work by appearing to already be overworked, or you get piled up more and more work until you are overworked.
reply
yyyyeeeaaaa..... I can see why they wouldn't wanna use that lol. I don't see how that would "drive you crazy"?
reply
Lol idk file explorer is pretty much fine? Finder is a joke but I've never really felt any need to replace File Explorer. Tree view, tabs, bookmarks/shortcuts...I've never really liked a two-pane UI vs just having two windows, or two tabs, and windows can snap two windows side by side with two key presses. What about TC is saving you serious amounts of time?
reply
I gotta love to get "for security/safety" reasons, and yet I get ads on anything served. Bonus points for YouTube.
reply
I mean I get it, as an admin there's only so much time you want to spend to support everyone's favorite setup. So "security/safety" is kind of a simple wave-off. It's sometimes just "we don't want to spend the time to figure out how to lock down this thing."
reply
Large companies' IT departments claim a lot of reasons for their policies. Often the underlying reason is unstated, and has more to do with convenience of governance or with sales relationships.
reply
That's weird. I used to work in a very secure facility (think actual air-gapped supercomputers where network access is building-LAN only) and Firefox was the only approved browser.
reply
if you are air-gapped, any browser should be fine?
reply
Air gapping is not a total barrier.

(you still need to get data in and out sometimes, Chips can be misused as radio antennas, loudspeakers can be used as microphone and do ultra sonic data transmission to other devices etc, so still making sure the software is under control on the Air gapped computer sounds like a good idea)

reply
That's the point, you'd think any browsers should be fine? But only Firefox was approved after OpSec department did their research. There were definitely something that made them very unhappy about Chromium to ban it wholesale.
reply
You can import/export a lot of data with just sound and video.
reply
If my company would tell me what browser should I use for work, I would look away from it. Fortunately all the companies I worked for didn't care what browser I use (even most people used Firefox anyway).
reply
Obviously experiences will vary, but I have now had three organizations express concern (though not to the point of telling me I must stop) that I use third-party Firefox derivatives. This started with Pale Moon and then continued with LibreWolf.

The concern is that they "aren't authorized apps". As I've read it, this is a proxy for "we aren't certain these apps can be trusted, but nobody ever got fired for pointing the finger at Mozilla or Google when something goes wrong, but would be fired if they pointed it at this one random guy in the Netherlands".

reply
That's exactly what they want, because there's tons of other people dying to take your place that barely know what a browser even is, who won't complain, and who will work for less money.
reply
At my (old) work we used Google Meet for meetings

I could not get audio on Firefox

It was the only site I ever found where I could not get audio and I suspect some Google malfeasance

When I initiated a meeting I used Jitsi, no such troubles

reply
I'd rather not have Firefox installed, than Firefox preloaded with MitM certificates, disabled uBlock Origin, Proxy Switcher, added Adobe, Copilot, and a few more "useful" extensions and security add-ons that can't be disabled, and so on.

If company IT gets hold of Firefox, it's not better than just using Edge or Chrome that comes by default.

reply
Note that Firefox Enterprise and Firefox can live side by side, so your workflow would still work, unless your corporate admin specifically moves to block it.
reply
hopefully the IT department pushes out uBlock Origin with whatever browsers they require people use. I used to push it out to several customers with the Chrome GPOs... although I know it doesn't work in Chrome anymore
reply
Of course they won't do that. That would require companies to admit that ads are a bad idea.
reply
uBlock Origin requires permission to read and alter anything on any website. Although I trust it, and I don't see an alternative for something like an ad-blocker, I can see how that would be a deal-killer for corporate IT.
reply
Yet corporations are all ok with letting people use Windows, that disclaims that it can send any data on your computer to MS at any time.
reply
It's insane how much access companies give MS. The insights they must have on so many companies by snooping on what they do in outlook and excel alone...
reply
Your web browser also has the ability to read and alter anything on any website, do you trust the makers of your web browser? (And everyone else in the supply chain...)
reply
Not surprisingly it's easy for a organization to trust Mozilla Corporation than to trust a random Canadian guy.
reply
I wouldn't call Raymond Hill a "random" Canadian guy. I am also fairly certain that these same organizations rely on code written by even more obscure, random individuals every day.
reply
AFAIK Firefox add-ons go through review before being uploaded, so this would actually only be an issue if you don't trust both the Canadian guy and Mozilla.
reply
Yes, they prefer ZScaler which can read and modify anything on any website and network resource, even when running on localhost.
reply
ZScaler comes from a vendor and a purchase agreement, uBlock Origin comes from "some guy" for free and that makes corporate folks uneasy. If Firefox would offer uBlock Origin in their enterprise version for $100/seat/month and market it as an "endpoint malware blocker for the cloud" instead of an ad blocker they'd probably get a lot of uptake.
reply
This is the best Mozilla product idea I've heard since they started trying to sell shit like VPN service.

Like seriously, Mozilla could probably make some serious revenue with this. I only wonder if it would open them up to getting sued, somehow.

reply
Exactly. My company mandates Chrome or Edge with no extensions for work, and the SSO only works with these. I use Firefox in the side for browsing because IT doesn’t control it and I can block ads.
reply
Nobody needs 2 browsers to support on locked down computers. There's no increase in functionality apart from making between 0 and 1 extremely niche users slightly more happy (but not more capable).
reply