grahamperrin

With Firefox 61.0.2 (64-bit) on FreeBSD at https://theintercept.com/2018/08/03/google-search-engine-china-censorship-backlash/ The same with beta 1.0.26 with Waterfox 56.2.2. $ date ; uname -v Sat 11 Aug 2018 09:26:09 BST FreeBSD 12.0-ALPHA1 #8 r337582: Sat Aug 11 06:20:55 BST 2018 root@momh167-gjp4-hpelitebook8570p-freebsd:/usr/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/sys/GENERIC

Thanks

Every attempt to upload this image to my edition of a reply fails, The affected post: https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/231248-clickbait-warning-unable-to-dismiss/?tab=comments#comment-1262477

I stumbled across this issue at https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/746756/Minnesota-storm-cloud-sea-smoke-rises-freezing-temperatures-Lake-Superior-Duluth-Harbor Re: https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/234400-intermittent-blocks/ there's intermittence so I had to open the page in a different Waterfox profile to gain a screenshot: Side note: audible playback of invisible content. An earlier shot of the red alert failing to appear: Around twenty-two minutes later, I don't know how long after a reload of the page, I found the red alert back, with the tab muted. After clicking the mute icon (it disappeared): … erm, I have a screenshot but there's repeated failure to upload to my edition of this post 😞

Intermittence noted at https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/232409-apnic-cloudflare-https-1111-and-captures-thereof-blocked/?tab=comments#comment-1259972 Another example: https://postimg.cc/image/wo9uo4mul/ Apparently blocked due to possible suspicious activity in some profiles, not blocked in others. Allowances might not be the explanation. In the profiles where no block appeared, there was no visible allowance for the domain. In one of the affected profiles (where a block appeared), a temporary allowance was followed by removal of the allowance. Then, strangely, no block; as if there's an invisible allowance (in other words, silent lack of protection). If it helps to diagnose this issue, the c80yckha.Malwarebytes profile mentioned at https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/231929-pup-causing-tabs-or-the-browser-to-crash-in-some-situations/?tab=comments#comment-1260992 is associated with crashes did not present the block had no visible allowance for the domain did present the block following a (Waterfox) refresh of the profile.

The ID for 1.0.26 beta is {242af0bb-db11-4734-b7a0-61cb8a9b20fb} Database file names in one of my test profiles suggest that there was a different ID for earlier versions of the extension: 24665943-e083-480f-979c-972ca6a46e41 Please: which versions of the extension were associated with that ID? Were there any other IDs?

Thanks

– that was with my everyday Waterfox profile. A crash of the entire application (multi-process Waterfox disabled). Subsequent uses of the same profile are crash-free at the time of writing. With a different profile, which I created for test purposes, multi-process enabled, the crashes are reproducible with 1.0.26 beta. I have a 9.5 MiB archive of the affected profile, c80yckha.Malwarebytes.zip dcollins, would you like me to send a private message with the .zip file?

https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/malwarebytes/versions/?page=1#version-1.0.26 I updated from 1.0.25 beta to 1.0.26 beta, loaded https://postimg.cc/image/s2gadwk8r/ with PUP disabled, no crash. Enabled PUP, reloaded the page: crash.

Not yet reproducible with a new profile (sorry) but I still have crashing with my everyday profile, and to simplify things: - it's reproducible with service workers disabled. Crashing at https://postimg.cc/image/wo9uo4mul/ (referred from https://redd.it/92eg9q). Waterfox 56.2.2, browser extension 1.0.25 beta. Screen recording to follow, crashing with just one other extension enabled (Extension Conflict Troubleshooter). I'd like to progress this, to minimise the risk of the extension causing crashes in any situation. Please, what would you suggest?

hxxps://1.1.1.1/ is Maybe strangely, the block appeared whilst I was browsing the page (without browsing away). Not before the page loaded. Similarly, hxxp://web.archive.org/web/20180630073822/https://1.1.1.1/ – blocked not when the capture was first loaded, I found it blocked a short while afterwards (whilst drafting this topic). Please, are these blocks appropriate? Background: APNIC Labs enters into a Research Agreement with Cloudflare | blabs.apnic.net Announcing 1.1.1.1: the fastest, privacy-first consumer DNS service Cloudflare launches 1.1.1.1 DNS service that will speed up your internet : technology – Reddit Here’s How To Plug One Of The Biggest Privacy Holes In The Internet – Fast Company Fixing reachability to 1.1.1.1, GLOBALLY!

Thanks. There's also https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/malwarebytes/privacy/ (2018-03-29) – a little older.

+1 I, too, would appreciate some insight from the developers of the software. I'd like to mention the extension for Firefox under https://redd.it/8um811, it'll make sense to have something reasonably authoritative here before doing so. We can at least use e.g. Extension source viewer alongside https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/malwarebytes/ to view the code, in particular: utils/telemetry.js