[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Is anyone successfully self-hosting Firefox ...
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Is anyone successfully self-hosting Firefox Sync?
I use Firefox as my primary browser, and I would absolutely love to
be able to use the Firefox Sync functionality to sync bookmarks,
etc. across several devices. However, I do not want to risk
storing absolutely sensitive data (browsing history, auth cookies,
credentials, etc) at some third party. Everytime this comes up in
HN comments, someone says that Firefox Sync can be self-hosted. And
while this was true in the older versions of Firefox, it seems to
me that self-hosting is currently neither supported nor documented.
And it has been like this for at least since 2020[1][2]. It seems
self-hosting is not a priority for Mozilla. Is anyone actually
self-hosting Firefox Sync? If so, how do you do it? How is it
working for you? Any issues to be aware of? [1]:
https://github.com/mozilla-services/syncstorage-rs/issues/681
(opened on Jun 22, 2020) [2]: https://github.com/mozilla-
services/syncstorage-rs/issues/550 (opened on May 26, 2020)
Author : hosteur
Score : 336 points
Date : 2023-02-06 08:00 UTC (15 hours ago)
| vasvir wrote:
| I had blog about it in case you want to set i up with apache as a
| proxy.
|
| Shameless plug: https://vasvir.wordpress.com/2021/03/30/firefox-
| sync-server-...
| egberts1 wrote:
| Self-hosting Firefox Sync does not work with Apple iOS-based
| Firefox.
|
| Simply because the URL of Firefox Sync hosting is hardcoded into
| the Firefox iOS app.
|
| Hence thwarted my zeal to self-host Firefox Sync.
|
| Heck, there is NOTHING configurable about Firefox iOS, not even
| an URL config:about.
| scns wrote:
| I read somewhere that Apple allowed other browsers on the
| AppStore, no more every browser is Safari with a different
| skin. Anyone else here who has better information?
| [deleted]
| SirGiggles wrote:
| Have you tried tapping the version number (under the in-app
| Settings) five times? That reveals an advanced sync settings
| near the top iirc.
| egberts1 wrote:
| Not there.
|
| But that press five times on the version menu item does not
| reveal anything useful from a self-hosting POV.
| asddubs wrote:
| i just copy the .mozilla folder over whenever i install a new
| device
| dblohm7 wrote:
| That only works when you're copying to the same OS. You run the
| change of entering into a world of hurt if your new device runs
| on a different platform.
| doubled112 wrote:
| Do you not use bookmarks? Or are yours so stable it isn't any
| work to keep up?
|
| This makes tons of sense to me with extensions and the other
| profile data, but not that.
| asddubs wrote:
| I just let them diverge. Most bookmarks I make are needed for
| a span of less than a week or I never use them again in the
| end. It's admittedly kind of a chaotic solution, but it works
| for how I use the browser.
| skozharinov wrote:
| I self-host syncserver in Docker, it is relatively easy to set
| up. The main issue is that it would not tell you that it doesn't
| work, instead it would silently leave a log file in your browser
| (about:sync-log). Once it is up and running, however, it works
| flawlessly. You also have to consider that syncserver is
| unmaintained and uses Python 2, which has long been EOL.
| mbwgh wrote:
| Why does every "Ask HN" I see come with a grey text color? Is
| this a stylistic thing or do people take issue with people asking
| questions and downvote?
| aamargulies wrote:
| HN does this purposefully to show its preference for external
| content rather than self posts.
| KronisLV wrote:
| I wonder if there could be an alternative way of getting the
| point across, as opposed to having low contrast text, which
| some tools report as an accessibility problem: https://wave.w
| ebaim.org/report#/https://news.ycombinator.com...
|
| But other than that, it's an interesting design choice.
| pancrufty wrote:
| HN does this because they don't care. It wouldn't take much
| to make this site usable, but they refuse to add 5 lines of
| CSS to make the site work in dark mode.
| SturgeonsLaw wrote:
| https://userstyles.org/styles/browse/ycombinator
| pancrufty wrote:
| Doesn't sound like a good default. I used those before,
| but I shouldn't _have to_ to make a website barely
| usable.
| groestl wrote:
| Aaaaah _facepalm_. Using this for a decade, never had a clue.
| MintPaw wrote:
| Wow, TIL after many years. Kinda scummy to show some content
| as artificially downvoted to drive engagement. I thought
| everyone hated questions...
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| Posts can't be downvoted.
| MintPaw wrote:
| Double TIL, I've never been able to downvote anything. I
| don't have a high enough score.
| cma wrote:
| I think he means the text of self posts looks similar to
| downvoted comments.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| Sure, but it's harder to argue that some posts appear
| downvoted in a deceptive way when the whole category of
| posts can't be downvoted. Even if that is what happens
| with comments.
| thrdbndndn wrote:
| div.toptext { color: black; }
| japanman425 wrote:
| Okay but why should I do that
| Karunamon wrote:
| If something is bothering you, it seems a bit weird to
| allow it to keep bothering you when the solution is so
| trivial.
| hosteur wrote:
| @plibither8: Maybe this is something Refined Hacker News
| extension could do? https://github.com/plibither8/refined-
| hacker-news
| fIREpOK wrote:
| HN does the same when you go through your settings and select
| "show hidden"... You "see" them but you dont.. The light gray
| goes even closer to the background color in this case.
| charles_f wrote:
| I self host most of my stuff for the reasons you mentioned, and
| that included Sync for a few years. I never got the auth part to
| work so I stopped trying and just used the sync server itself.
|
| I stopped doing that after some time, it seemed too futile.
| Errors are hard to debug and you're on your own, plus I was not
| using it for passwords or CC, so it just wasn't worth it.
| rayusher wrote:
| What other stuff do you host?
| [deleted]
| Mikescher wrote:
| Shameless plug: A while ago I wrote a cli for firefox sync [1]
| (in my case mostly to automate some stuff when I create
| bookmarks).
|
| It does not really solve your problem for browser-
| history/credentials etc. But as long as you use a client that you
| verified you can be kinda sure the data is E2E encrypted and
| can't be read by Mozilla.
|
| Also on a side note: To this day the weave protocol is one of the
| more (needlessly) complex protocols I ever implemented and I'm
| still not sure what problems some of the design decisions
| solve...
|
| [1] github.com/mikescher/firefox-sync-client
| Wicher wrote:
| This looks very useful, thanks for creating!
| tommica wrote:
| Maybe this article can help you decide?
| https://homegrowntechie.com/self-host-your-browser-data/
| pepa65 wrote:
| This one seemed to be doing more: https://github.com/crazy-
| max/docker-firefox-syncserver
| pepa65 wrote:
| Just tried that, it's just broken (at least, those
| instructions).
| arkadiyt wrote:
| > However, I do not want to risk storing absolutely sensitive
| data (browsing history, auth cookies, credentials, etc) at some
| third party.
|
| FWIW Firefox says they do not have the capability to read your
| data: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-privacy/
| [deleted]
| gorgoiler wrote:
| Unfortunately, this isn't really true. The party which holds
| your data is also the party which ships evergreen versions of
| the software used to decrypt that data. There's nothing to stop
| the government in Firefox's jurisdiction from bullying them
| into adding a backdoor. We can assume the bullying is ongoing.
|
| I like to imagine it as having a safe deposit box provided by a
| local bank. I have the only key and have proven that to be the
| case. I also store the key at home in another safe which is
| regularly serviced by bank employees. While they probably don't
| abuse their position in the latter to access the former, it
| would be completely wrong to say _they do not have the
| capability_ to get at my stuff.
|
| All that aside, I love FF sync and rely on it everyday for work
| stuff. It is like magic and I'm very grateful for the feature.
| I am realistic about the NSA's level of interest in my work
| calendar and the threat they pose to my day to day life.
| dodgerdan wrote:
| Then you can't trust the FF code not to send a copy to their
| own servers also.
| alias_neo wrote:
| Why would you need to trust it? Just block access to their
| servers on your network.
|
| Anyone _that_ concerned can operate a whitelist-only policy
| on their network, now nothing goes anywhere they don't want
| it to.
| hosteur wrote:
| White-listing what addresses a web browser can reach
| seems to go against the intended use - you know, to
| browse the web.
|
| Edit: Also, I don't think this is as much about trust as
| it is about avoiding being part of the huge target that
| the centrally hosted Firefox Sync servers must be.
|
| While Firefox developers and Mozilla might be wholly
| trustworthy, they might become compromised by some
| configuration error or zero day vulnerability. So someone
| might steal the sweet sweet treasure that is in the Sync
| servers. Now, that is encrypted of course, but they might
| have made a simple error[1] in how encryption is
| implemented and the encryption may be defeated.
|
| [1]: See for example: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archi
| ves/2008/05/random_number...
| bluGill wrote:
| If you have something you are that concerned about then
| you should whitelist everything. Note that the whitelist
| needs to be one both sides, the server and the users.
| This along with lots of other security protections, some
| of which are a lot stronger than a whitelist.
| parminya wrote:
| Instead of directly exposing the server to the internet,
| you could keep it behind a VPN. That way you only need to
| keep the VPN secure, the VPN serves as a whitelist.
| bluGill wrote:
| Banks always drill out the lock on a safe deposit box if they
| need to get in, even though it wouldn't be hard for someone
| to pick the lock (or so lockpicks who claim to have the
| ability to check this say, I've never tried to pick the lock
| on a safe deposit box, and my lockpick skills are not very
| good so I doubt I could)
| iso1631 wrote:
| > I have the only key and have proven that to be the case
|
| Locksmiths will get through that lock in a couple of minutes,
| probably without you ever knowing
|
| The only thing stopping the bank and/or government from
| accessing your box is the law
| danuker wrote:
| And we all know from Snowden/Assange how effective that is.
| ptsneves wrote:
| This is what I learned over the years after my techno
| fantasies were confronted with the real world. Technology
| can give you good protections to make blanket or mass
| interference on people's affairs costly, but the illusion
| of safety it gives is over emphasised.
|
| A very motivated actor will just knock on your door and ask
| you for the key(digital or otherwise) at gun point and it
| is game over.
|
| Like one of the replies above, model your threat and enjoy
| like free of paranoia. It is a beautiful world out there!
| Ah and be politically active so your representatives
| preserve common freedom and well being.
| arkadiyt wrote:
| > The party which holds your data is also the party which
| ships evergreen versions of the software used to decrypt that
| data. There's nothing to stop the government in Firefox's
| jurisdiction from bullying them into adding a backdoor.
|
| Hosting your own sync server doesn't prevent this.
| tinus_hn wrote:
| The government can't bully you into decrypting your own
| data or releasing your encrypted data without you knowing.
| mrmanner wrote:
| They can bully the open sourcerer into adding a backdoor
| to the code, then use that backdoor without you noticing.
| tinus_hn wrote:
| There can be no guarantee you'd not notice, but more
| importantly if you go down that path you can't trust
| anything and that is a silly reason to not build defense
| in depth and not entrust your secrets to the cloud.
| robin_reala wrote:
| Which government? Because there absolutely are
| governments that can, UK for example.
| tinus_hn wrote:
| The UK government can bully you into telling them things
| without you knowing you told them those things? That
| sounds interesting, how does that work?
| robin_reala wrote:
| Oops, misread the "without you knowing" bit.
| robjan wrote:
| If Firefox is backdoored, as per GP's hypothetical
| situation, your data can be sent to a sync server other
| than the one you configured.
|
| The only realistic way to stop it would be to only use a
| specific audited version of FF. If that's the case then
| there's no need to use your own sync server because you
| already know it's not backdoored.
| HPsquared wrote:
| That's also an option in Chrome, "encrypt sync data with your
| own sync passphrase"
| hosteur wrote:
| > FWIW Firefox says they do not have the capability to read
| your data: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/11/firefox-sync-
| privacy/
|
| The article is from 2018. Isn't this only relating to the old
| version of Firefox Sync - the one in which self-hosting is
| actually supported?
|
| The design looks reasonable. However, my main problem with it
| is that putting all this extremely valuable data in one place
| makes it a huge target. A supply-chain attack or an
| implementation error in the crypto would be devastating.
| balu_ wrote:
| unfortunately not anymore, in the early days of firefox sync back
| when it was called wave it was easy to selfhost. Just throw
| some[1] php files to a host and it worked. Then mozilla changed
| it to use multiple services (auth, ...) it got difficult and the
| documentation wasn't easy to access.
|
| At that time i stoped selfhosting & using it :(
|
| [1]: https://github.com/balu-/FSyncMS
| yownie wrote:
| I found the lockwise app very useful for FF sync and have no idea
| why they shitcanned it.
|
| I don't really understand how Mozilla continues to function at
| all as an org.
| mnoorenberghe wrote:
| The functionality is (mostly) built into Firefox now so there's
| little need for a separate app. You can enable native app
| autofill for both Android and iOS. There are a few things that
| should still be done to improve the experience but it doesn't
| seem like a priority now.
| the_third_wave wrote:
| No, I used to host the previous version but when that stopped
| working (including the workarounds which kept it going for a bit
| longer) I ceased using it. While the sync server itself is not
| that much of an effort to get going, the auth server is. I do not
| use external auth services when I can avoid it so I chose to
| forego on using sync instead of creating a "Firefox account". If
| I ever find an easier way to get the auth server running _and_ if
| I still use Firefox by that time I might start using it again but
| until that time it is a no-go.
|
| To Mozilla: fire your overpaid activist CEO Mitchell Baker and
| use the resulting funds to hire (back) the developers she got rid
| of, clean up the mess, get rid of the social justice nonsense and
| _take back your place as a browser development organisation_
| instead of a 'colours of change' peddler.
| gpchelkin wrote:
| https://kmj.at/en/Setup_Firefox_Sync_standalone_or_Firefox_F...
| cricalix wrote:
| I think it's worth noting that that document links to the
| Github for the sync server, and that page says "Note that this
| repository is no longer being maintained. Use this at your own
| risk, and with the understanding that it is not being
| maintained, work is being done on its replacement, and that no
| support or assistance will be offered." So yes, you can
| probably get it running in docker, but bugs etc won't be fixed
| unless you're comfortable working on older Python code.
| nottorp wrote:
| I've got a related question but about more restricted
| capabilities:
|
| I'd like to sync just bookmarks without joining the "Firefox
| ecosystem" or any other ecosystem.
|
| Is there some bookmark sync extension with a self hosted sync
| solution or that will just sync via a (service similar to)
| Dropbox folder?
|
| Edit: syncing via a git repo would be fine for example :)
| seabrookmx wrote:
| floccus is an option.
| xnickb wrote:
| xbrowsersync
| NilsIRL wrote:
| Firefox Sync uses send-to-end encryption.
|
| So self hosting isn't as necessary.
| williamvds wrote:
| I've self-hosted the original Firefox syncserver[0] for a couple
| of years now. It's a now unmaintained Python 2 + gunicorn web
| app.
|
| It still uses the Firefox identities service, since I haven't
| bothered to try setting that one up myself. That means I need a
| Firefox/Mozilla account even with a self-hosted sync server,
| which isn't ideal.
|
| Note that Mozilla do provide a script to delete all your data
| from their servers[1], in case you were using Firefox sync before
| going self-hosted.
|
| I originally went through the setup instructions manually. Now
| I've created a Nix package[2] and NixOS module for it[3], which
| was an adventure by itself. I can now easily reproduce the setup,
| which I did while migrating my webserver to a different provider.
|
| As for why I didn't try syncstorage-rs, it's rather petty, but
| the old syncserver was working well for me, and it doesn't yet
| support SQLite.
|
| [0] https://github.com/mozilla-services/syncserver
|
| [1] https://github.com/mozilla-services/syncserver#removing-
| mozi...
|
| [2]
| https://git.sr.ht/~williamvds/config/tree/master/item/nix/pk...
|
| [3]
| https://git.sr.ht/~williamvds/config/tree/master/item/nix/mo...
| pieter_mj wrote:
| >Note that Mozilla do provide a script to delete all your data
| from their servers[1], in case you were using Firefox sync
| before going self-hosted.
|
| Note : You'll need to disable 2fa first on your account before
| you can delete the data.
| pmarreck wrote:
| I think Nix, as struggle-full as it was, was the right choice,
| here, although I don't see the flake.nix file
| williamvds wrote:
| The flake starts at this level:
| https://git.sr.ht/~williamvds/config/tree/master/item/nix
|
| Struggle is a good way to put it! I feel I hit one of Nix's
| pain points here: packaging software whose dependencies are
| largely missing from Nixpkgs. On top of that, it was a Python
| app, and the state of Python packaging is quite a mess.
|
| I also feel it Nix was the right choice. My journey was
| rather harsh, but I do believe in its approach.
| pmarreck wrote:
| The thing that guts me a little is that Nix is also perfect
| for software preservation, which unfortunately must include
| Python 2 apps. But meanwhile they've dropped support for
| Python 2, which means you either have to go with some
| clever flake solution or something like what you did.
|
| I'm dealing with an app that is breaking every time I try
| to upgrade a few-years-old version of Node, a version that
| is no longer on nixpkgs. Right now I just want something
| that works; I didn't sufficiently budget for ongoing
| maintenance as the whole site's behind a login.
| williamvds wrote:
| Another option is to find a Nixpkgs commit which does
| contain the version of a package that you want. You can
| pin and import it as a Flake input, and use the old
| version of the package provided.
|
| So in its own way, Nix and Nixpkgs do serve the purpose
| of software preservation, as long as you have the full
| commit history for Nixpkgs.
|
| Preservation doesn't imply maintenance however. It's fair
| for Nixpkgs to delete packages that are no longer
| supported, as that's a burden on the limited number of
| maintainers.
|
| By recreating the package and module in my own Flake,
| I've taken on responsibility for maintaining it myself,
| and not adding any work to the Nixpkgs maintainers.
|
| NixOS modules in particular aren't easy to extend, so I
| ended up copying it entirely. And to be honest, the
| thought of using an old version of Nixpkgs didn't cross
| my mind while setting up syncserver. Hopefully it's
| easier to maintain with poetry2nix now that I've got the
| package working.
| kevincox wrote:
| Have you considered upstreaming the package and module to
| nixpkgs? It would be awesome to have those one line of config
| away for all nixpkgs users.
| williamvds wrote:
| I briefly considered it, but there are some big problems:
|
| - The new replacement package, syncserver-rs, has already
| been added to Nixpkgs, along with a NixOS module [0]
|
| - Python 2 and the package itself are no longer supported,
| meaning...
|
| - support in Nixpkgs is pretty rough - dependencies have been
| updated such that they no longer support Python 2, or have
| been removed outright, meaning...
|
| - syncserver has already been removed from Nixpkgs
|
| - in order to avoid the problem of unsupported dependencies,
| I delegated dependency resolution to a community project,
| poetry2nix[1]. Even so, it was a nightmare to get working,
| lots of hacks and workarounds were needed
|
| Of course, my repo is public, so anyone is welcome to use the
| Flake within. If they do, I'd suggest dropping me a line so I
| don't do anything drastic to the package or module.
|
| [0] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/176835
|
| [1] https://github.com/nix-community/poetry2nix
| kevincox wrote:
| Yeah, Python2 alone is enough to not bother. Hopefully the
| new version "ships" soon.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| The first few lines in the repo you mention illustrate the
| problem:
|
| > Note that this repository is no longer being maintained. Use
| this at your own risk, and with the understanding that it is
| not being maintained, work is being done on its replacement,
| and that no support or assistance will be offered.
|
| And its replacement syncserver-rs is in this forever-unfinished
| state so they've effectively killed self-hosting. At least from
| a support standpoint.
| MawKKe wrote:
| Sounds like classic case of "Second System Effect"
| ninju wrote:
| Better known as "if its not broken, break it"
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect
| williamvds wrote:
| Good point, I'll update the comment to indicate syncserver is
| now unmaintained.
|
| Of course, everything self-hosted is at my own risk etc. And
| official support is a luxury in this kind of FOSS, I
| generally don't count on it.
|
| But since it works for me, it may be worth sharing the
| details.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| I agree that a lack of support isn't a huge issue for this
| kind of thing. I'm more worried about the maintenance, like
| a vulnerability remaining unpatched (it being python 2
| doesn't help either) or a protocol change that makes the
| old server suddenly unviable.
|
| I really wish they'd just finish the Rust version. That
| would solve everything.
| toyg wrote:
| I don't understand. The original was barely 500 lines of code
| in two files, everything else being packaging machinery. Yes
| it's python 2, but how hard could have it been to port 500
| LOCs to 3.x...? Even assuming some crypto libraries broke,
| surely there are working equivalents?
|
| Instead, they went for a Big Rewrite in Rust, resulting in a
| much bigger codebase that will be much harder to maintain...
| and broke it anyway.
| Tepix wrote:
| What other self-hosted bookmark sync solutions exist that work
| with Firefox (and perhaps other browsers)?
| FireInsight wrote:
| I used to use xbrowsersync [0] for cross-browser sync and rn
| I'm using raindrop [1]. Xbrowsersync is self-hostable, but
| raindrop is not. Both are FOSS.
|
| There's also a big list of different projects here:
| https://github.com/awesome-selfhosted/awesome-selfhosted#boo...
|
| [0] https://www.xbrowsersync.org/ [1] https://raindrop.io/
| johnchristopher wrote:
| I am using https://github.com/sissbruecker/linkding at the
| moment.
| mackrevinack wrote:
| ive been using floccus for a few months now and its been
| working ok so far.
|
| it syncs to the webdav server on my synology but there's also
| the option to sync it using decsync (which is sort of like a
| local webdav server for each device) and some other sync
| service like syncthing or dropbox to sync the files.
|
| floccus has an android app or it can also be installed as a
| normal extension with the kiwi browser.
|
| i tried xbrowsersync first but i had some issue when i used it
| with vivaldi where a new copy of my bookmarks showed up in the
| "deleted bookmarks" section every time a sync happened, and i
| couldn't see any way of fixing that either which is why i went
| with floccus in the end
| seabrookmx wrote:
| +1 for Floccus
|
| I run a simple little docker container (found the image on
| github)[1] to host the webdav server myself, since I don't
| run Nextcloud or anything else that exposes webdav. It works
| quite well for me.
|
| [1]: https://github.com/marlluslustosa/Floccus-WebDavDocker
| berndinox wrote:
| Vaultwarden for Passwordsync and Wallabag for Bookmarks.
|
| Con: no ,,real" Firefox Sync - Pro: no ,,real" Firefox Sync - it
| works on any device with any browser, data is self-hosted
| NoboruWataya wrote:
| I set up Wallabag recently for this very purpose. My initial
| impression is that it mainly focuses on fetching and storing
| the content itself, rather than giving you an easy to navigate
| bookmark library. So it's great for, eg, saving long-form
| articles and blog posts, but not so good for bookmarking
| interactive/dynamic content.
| captn3m0 wrote:
| I faced enough issues that I switched to the Mozilla endpoints.
| Problems ranged from no clear documentation for configuration,
| unclear resource usage, no documented method to host identity as
| well. My one hope was to get my data exported via SQLite for fun
| stuff, as an automated export. But the data format was also not
| well documented, so that never happened.
| omani wrote:
| I was thinking about doing this with my own custom setup. Im
| thinking of putting the folder .mozilla into a gocryptfs
| encrypted folder and use syncthing to sync it between devices.
| 3np wrote:
| Yes, and I went the whole mile. I wrote a couple of comments on
| it previously[0][1], which at least lay out the required images
| for a full stack. As you can see it doesn't use the newer release
| but it still runs fine on latest FF. Though you probably want the
| new version. Can't imagine it being significantly worse to get up
| and running now.
|
| TLDR: If you're OK with piggybacking on them for auth, it's
| straightforward, easy and lightweight. If you want to be fully
| self-sufficient and leak no data you need to either implement a
| replacement for fxa (seriously this would be appreciated and
| maybe less effort if you're coming in fresh) or host that whole
| machinery of microservices - this is where the head-scratching
| starts and you need some dedication for it.
|
| I encourage other people to do it, and do go to whichever is more
| appropriate of the Matrix room or the GitHub Issues and engage
| when you hit things that are out of date, unclear, or broken.
|
| [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30315816
|
| [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30727935
| wasmitnetzen wrote:
| Yes, I'm running it with the mozilla/syncserver docker image[1],
| but still using the hosted identity service. The setup procedure
| is a bit fickle, the error handling on Firefox' side is quite
| bad, sometimes the first sync times out when you have a larger
| data set, and you need to manually enable each sync type to
| reduce the size. But once it's up and running, I don't really
| have any issues.
|
| I do hope that syncstorage-rs will become usable eventually and
| hopefully improve performance.
|
| Note: contrary to your post, cookies are not synced.
|
| [1]: https://hub.docker.com/r/mozilla/syncserver
| [deleted]
| heywoodlh wrote:
| What is gained from self hosting the container? Are you able to
| sync more data than Firefox's official Sync service? Less
| reliance on a third party service? Would love to understand the
| value-add.
|
| Their docs[0] make it seem like little would be gained from a
| privacy/security perspective as it seems pretty secure/private
| (at least to me).
|
| [0] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-firefox-sync-
| keeps-...
| eqvinox wrote:
| You could put your self-hosted container in a self-hosted VPN
| to add a layer of protection.
|
| But honestly, while encryption theoretically can make any
| data "safe" to hand to a 3rd party, it's just good "data
| hygiene" to keep it under your own control. If someone steals
| the Firefox sync database now, and some part of the
| encryption scheme is later broken by e.g. quantum computers,
| the thieves could retroactively decrypt your sync account
| data.
|
| And there's also the question of metadata - when does your
| Firefox send data to sync, and how much? Are you sure there's
| nothing to glean from that?
| smarnach wrote:
| You are making the assumption that you can secure your own
| instance of Sync better than Mozilla can secure theirs.
| smeagull wrote:
| From Mozilla? Absolutely.
| cricalix wrote:
| Anecdotally, I miss the days of Netscape combined with Netscape
| Enterprise Server. Ran it at college, and you could log in to any
| Netscape browser and all your bookmarks appeared. Then NES died,
| Netscape became Mozilla and it all went away.
|
| I see there are bookmark sync extensions, but only bookmarks (and
| I didn't check if those extensions allow self hosting).
|
| I suppose you could always run Firefox portable from a location
| that was Dropbox/Nextcloud/syncthing/whatever synced. Just don't
| run two instances at once, or the SQLite DBs will have a bad
| time?
| mvdwoord wrote:
| I miss Xmarks... I believe it was killed off completely when
| lastpass was aquired by Logmein, a couple of years ago. Xmarks
| really hit the spot for me for syncing bookmarks. It did only
| that, across browsers, across machines, and because It was
| limited to bookmarks sync, I had no qualms about using the same
| account on employer provided machines.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmarks_Sync
| hosteur wrote:
| > I suppose you could always run Firefox portable from a
| location that was Dropbox/Nextcloud/syncthing/whatever synced.
| Just don't run two instances at once, or the SQLite DBs will
| have a bad time?
|
| I do something to that effect. However, it does not come
| without problems. Running parallel instances is one of them...
| Also, cross platform is a problem.
| cricalix wrote:
| Hypothetically, since I have no way to test this easily right
| now, you only need to run the profile directory in a synced
| location and run the exe from a platform-specific portable
| directory.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-06 23:02 UTC)