Open Bug 1835372 Opened 1 year ago Updated 4 months ago

Containers settings should explain that containers are not available in private windows (including permanent private browsing mode)

Categories

(Firefox :: Settings UI, defect, P5)

Firefox 115
Desktop
All
defect

Tracking

()

Tracking Status
firefox115 --- affected

People

(Reporter: thorin, Unassigned)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

Attached image containers.png

STR

  • start in PB mode, and/or have containers disabled
  • go to about:preferences#privacy - note no containers UI
  • go to about:preferences#containers - containers UI is available

This is causing some confusion for Tor Browser and Mullvad Browser users.

(In reply to Simon Mainey from comment #0)

This is causing some confusion for Tor Browser and Mullvad Browser users.

Can you elaborate on why/how?

Flags: needinfo?(simon.mainey)

Can you elaborate on why/how?

TB/MB start in PBmode and containers aren't compatible - and in particular, MB users are trying to "do things" and getting into all sorts of nooks and crannies (and creating extra help desk/issues - e.g. see one example at https://github.com/mullvad/mullvad-browser/issues/92#issuecomment-1564727634 if you want to). Perhaps a solution is to hide the about:preferences#containers card if in PBmode (i.e browser.privatebrowsing.autostart = true and/or also put wording there that containers do not work in Private Windows (for people in normal mode who use one off PB windows). It's not critical but would be a nice touch :)

Rui Hildt is the MB person, I'll cc him

Flags: needinfo?(simon.mainey) → needinfo?(ruihildt)

Perhaps a solution is to hide the about:preferences#containers card ...

I need more coffee. It's already hidden. I mean to return the Hmm. That address doesn’t look right. interstitial. Sorry for the noise

I mean I'm a little inclined to wontfix this, tbh. If people go out of their way to configure containers then they can? Like, even if we hide the UI they can modify containers.json directly, set the relevant prefs in about:config and whatnot. We can't really protect them from themselves. But we hide the entrypoint for a reason...

Fixing this would probably involve changing https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/9cd4ea81e27db6b767f1d9bbbcf47da238dd64fa/browser/components/preferences/preferences.js#206 to happen conditional on the relevant prefs.

Severity: -- → S4
Type: enhancement → defect
OS: Unspecified → All
Priority: -- → P5
Hardware: Unspecified → Desktop
Summary: about:preferences#containers → about:preferences#containers shows up when loaded directly, even if privacy.userContext.enabled and privacy.userContext.ui.enabled are false

I spoke with rui earlier. I tried to frame it as reducing friction for both TB/MB and FF users.

<me> so to reduce friction (and save help support etc) I framed this as a issue that also benefits FF users
<me> so when the UI is hidden or when it's not even compatible (e.g. start in PBM), the settings UI for containers can cause users confusion
<me> and it seems as if `about:preferences#containers` (dump it in your urlbar) bypasses the hidden card in settings
<me> so I suggested two things - add something to the containers card about containers not working in PB windows
<me> and secondly if starting in PBM, we could make `about:preferences#containers` return nothing like if you tried to enter `about:ruihildt`
<me> this would reduce friction and help inform users - albeit the urlbar access is beyond the scope of reasonable code IMO

so entirely understandable and I agree = albeit the urlbar access is beyond the scope of reasonable code IMO

but I do think adding localized text is a good idea. e.g. containers only work in private windows [learn more]. maybe with a conditional you have started in PBMode bit. Something for UX to decide and then everyone benefits - I do not think is it well known that containers are not compatible with PBM, so this is as good a place as any to learn more

Flags: needinfo?(ruihildt)

(In reply to Simon Mainey from comment #5)

but I do think adding localized text is a good idea. e.g. containers only work in private windows [learn more]. maybe with a conditional you have started in PBMode bit. Something for UX to decide and then everyone benefits - I do not think is it well known that containers are not compatible with PBM, so this is as good a place as any to learn more

This doesn't seem unreasonable (though I assume you mean "*non-*private windows"?). We could morph this bug if you like. It's documented on SUMO but a note in the settings UI would not hurt, I think. Would that make sense, or do you think we should keep this open as well as add some wording to the page? In that case we'd probably want a different bug...

Flags: needinfo?(simon.mainey)

oophs .. yes, I mean e.g. containers only work in **non** private windows [learn more]

Agreed. Let's morph the bug to "add UX to containers card re PBM" and drop the url hack ideas. Let's keep it simple :)

Flags: needinfo?(simon.mainey)
Summary: about:preferences#containers shows up when loaded directly, even if privacy.userContext.enabled and privacy.userContext.ui.enabled are false → Containers settings should explain that containers are not available in private windows (including permanent private browsing mode)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: