Add a safe search setting to Firefox which applies across all search engines
Categories
(Firefox :: Search, enhancement, P5)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: stevelfc, Unassigned)
Details
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:67.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/67.0
Steps to reproduce:
When you search using any search engine, to keep my search safe (no adult content), for any and every search engine I have to manually set the Safe Search option to Strict (no adult content), the problem with this is it can easily be switched off. It occurred to me that this could be done by the browser by automatically setting Safe Search to Strict.
The way I envisage this working is that, when you run the Firefox installer you get a checkbox you cant tick to lock safe search on permanently, so that regardless of what search engine you use Safe Search will be permanently set to Strict (no adult content) and there is no way of changing this either, if anyone doesn't require this feature then then simply don't check the box on installation. Perhaps you could consider implementing this feature as a spin-off of Firefox and call it SafeFox, either way this would make Firefox the most popular browser as currently there isn't a safe browser and there are many organisations worldwide that are crying out for such a browser, especially parents, schools, educational and religious establishments and many more.
|
||
Comment 1•5 years ago
|
||
Bugbug thinks this bug should belong to this component, but please revert this change in case of error.
There are a few typos in the description, but frustratingly I cannot edit the description after I submitted it, so here's what I meant to write:
When you search using any search engine, to keep a search safe (no adult content), for any and every search engine, you have to manually set the Safe Search option to Strict (no adult content), the problem with this is it can easily be switched off. It occurred to me that this could be done by the browser by automatically setting Safe Search to Strict.
The way I envisage this working is that, when you run the Firefox installer you get a checkbox you can tick to lock safe search on permanently, so that regardless of what (Firefox supported) search engine you use, Safe Search will be permanently locked on (set to Strict (no adult content)) and there is no way of changing this either, if anyone doesn't require this feature then then simply don't check the box on installation.
Perhaps you could consider implementing this feature as a spin-off of Firefox and call it SafeFox, either way this would make Firefox the most popular browser as currently there isn't a safe browser out there and there are many organisations worldwide that are crying out for such a browser, especially parents, schools, educational and religious establishments and many more.
|
||
Comment 3•5 years ago
|
||
See https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sas/ for the "Enforce SafeSearch" add-on which already covers this use case.
(In reply to SteveLFC from comment #0)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:67.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/67.0
Steps to reproduce:
When you search using any search engine, to keep my search safe (no adult content), for any and every search engine I have to manually set the Safe Search option to Strict (no adult content), the problem with this is it can easily be switched off. It occurred to me that this could be done by the browser by automatically setting Safe Search to Strict.
The way I envisage this working is that, when you run the Firefox installer you get a checkbox you cant tick to lock safe search on permanently, so that regardless of what search engine you use Safe Search will be permanently set to Strict (no adult content) and there is no way of changing this either, if anyone doesn't require this feature then then simply don't check the box on installation. Perhaps you could consider implementing this feature as a spin-off of Firefox and call it SafeFox, either way this would make Firefox the most popular browser as currently there isn't a safe browser and there are many organisations worldwide that are crying out for such a browser, especially parents, schools, educational and religious establishments and many more.
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #3)
See https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sas/ for the "Enforce SafeSearch" add-on which already covers this use case.
You are missing the point that is not a solution and you should just mark it as RESOLVED AND WONTFIX because this isnt a bug its an enhancement request and just pasting in a link is insufficient, dont you think I have tried all those useless plugins, the problem with those is that plugins can be uninstalled and also most are not password protected rendering them useless. My suggestion is this could be achieved by Firefox as I explained and there would be no need for a third party plugin as most people would rather Firefox take responsibility instead of leaving it to untrustworthy third party plugins.
I would merely like enhancement to at least considered not just immediately dismissed.
|
|
||
Comment 6•5 years ago
|
||
You are missing the point that is not a solution and you should just mark it as RESOLVED AND WONTFIX because this isnt a bug its an enhancement request
Both fixing bugs and implementing enhancement requests can be declined.
and just pasting in a link is insufficient, dont you think I have tried all those useless plugins,
I don't know as you hadn't told. :)
the problem with those is that plugins can be uninstalled and also most are not password protected rendering them useless
That sounds like the underlying issue to solve here is to not allow users to disable or uninstall an add-on?
I'm not sure if http://kb.mozillazine.org/Locking_preferences is still up-to-date when it comes to that...
instead of leaving it to untrustworthy third party plugins.
I don't see how third party plugins are "untrustworthy" per se. To the contrary, throwing each and every functionality into the core software base makes code unmaintainable and expensive (that's a general statement, not specifically referring to this feature request). However, a quality assurance process for add-ons is probably a different topic...
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #6)
You are missing the point that is not a solution and you should just mark it as RESOLVED AND WONTFIX because this isnt a bug its an enhancement request
Both fixing bugs and implementing enhancement requests can be declined.
and just pasting in a link is insufficient, dont you think I have tried all those useless plugins,
I don't know as you hadn't told. :)
the problem with those is that plugins can be uninstalled and also most are not password protected rendering them useless
That sounds like the underlying issue to solve here is to not allow users to disable or uninstall an add-on?
I'm not sure if http://kb.mozillazine.org/Locking_preferences is still up-to-date when it comes to that...instead of leaving it to untrustworthy third party plugins.
I don't see how third party plugins are "untrustworthy" per se. To the contrary, throwing each and every functionality into the core software base makes code unmaintainable and expensive (that's a general statement, not specifically referring to this feature request). However, a quality assurance process for add-ons is probably a different topic...
Ok maybe I used the wrong word "untrustworthy" and I never suggested for one minute you should go " throwing each and every functionality into the core software base", nothing that anywhere near that dramatic, all I am saying is that we shouldn't have to install a plugin or in this case plugin(s) to obtain what I consider to be a basic safety/security feature, which could easily be implemented and built into the browser as I described, in order that we can install this browser and straight out of the box its safe and we can protect ourselves and children from seeing, what can I call it? inappropriate and undesired content by simply providing this functionality as a built-in feature that enables us to achieve this, which would be child's play to implement but would benefit not only ever parent in this world but many organisations worldwide.
I am done now trying to convince you, I didn't realise it was down to one person to decide and that it would be so difficult to merely submit an enhancement request, I expected that this would at the very minimum, be put to the developers for their consideration. Where I have ever worked we've taken all enhancement requests from the customer and discussed each and every one and we as a team as well as input from beneficiary's decide if it has a use case and benefits either a group or large number of the user base.
|
|
||
Comment 8•5 years ago
|
||
which could easily be implemented
It sounds like you have already taken a look at the code to be able to judge that it is easy. In that case, please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/How_to_Submit_a_Patch and https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Hacking_Firefox/Getting_started_with_contributing_patches_to_the_Firefox_preferences if you're interested in writing and maintaining patches.
I didn't realise it was down to one person to decide
It is not; nobody ever implied so. However when proposing additional code there are many factors to consider, so it's common that discussion takes place when there might already be a solution to a problem (that's why I linked to an add-on), as people don't like spending time reinventing wheels.
Have you tried following http://kb.mozillazine.org/Locking_preferences ?
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #8)
which could easily be implemented
It sounds like you have already taken a look at the code to be able to judge that it is easy. In that case, please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/How_to_Submit_a_Patch and https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Hacking_Firefox/Getting_started_with_contributing_patches_to_the_Firefox_preferences if you're interested in writing and maintaining patches.
I didn't realise it was down to one person to decide
It is not; nobody ever implied so. However when proposing additional code there are many factors to consider, so it's common that discussion takes place when there might already be a solution to a problem (that's why I linked to an add-on), as people don't like spending time reinventing wheels.
Have you tried following http://kb.mozillazine.org/Locking_preferences ?
Gees, there you go again making a drama with talk of reinventing the wheel, you go reinvent wheels if you like, all I am asking for this simple enhancement to be considered. Add-ons are not the answer when it concerns security, because I already have both these add-ons installed ( safe-search and public fox) but they cannot be used to implement a security feature such as a safe search feature, since all someone has to do is restart the browser with add-ons disabled and then disable the add-ons that's what I meant when I said plugins are pretty much useless.
|
|
||
Comment 10•5 years ago
|
||
I don't think accusing people of "making a drama" is helpful when discussing existing solutions, discussing which aspects those solutions might lack for your specific use case, and explaining that software development comes with a long-term cost. Could you please answer my question that I've asked twice?
To me it still sounds like the underlying problem to solve is restricting users to disable add-ons, as add-ons to solve the problem already exist.
|
Reporter | |
Comment 11•5 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #10)
I don't think accusing people of "making a drama" is helpful when discussing existing solutions, discussing which aspects those solutions might lack for your specific use case, and explaining that software development comes with a long-term cost. Could you please answer my question that I've asked twice?
I have only reiterated what you have said with talk of "throwing each and every functionality into the core software base..." and talk of reinventing wheels", which all sounds dramatic.
To me it still sounds like the underlying problem to solve is restricting users to disable add-ons, as add-ons to solve the problem already exist.
No I don't agree at all, its seems you're looking at this as if its a bug report and being continually dismissive, its an "enhancement request" and I have stated the case for this feature and described why add-ons are not a viable option to implement a safe-search feature such as this and I believe that there is a use case for safe-search facility to be built into the browser itself and that there would be a significant proportion of the user base that would welcome this feature, so that we could simply install Firefox with safe-search on, simple, no need for admin or passwords or add-ons or any such complecity, it would also be a good feature to promote Firefox and add something that commercial browsers don't have.
|
||
Comment 12•5 years ago
|
||
Although this is mainly about search, I think there's a wider part of this about how to lock down user settings. Hence I'm moving this across to the general component.
Some of this could, today, be performed by a user deploying as an enterprise instance with locked-down preferences. Though to me, this feels more like a social issue - as far as I know, most major engines have safe search by default, so the need to "lock it" is to disallow someone to change it, if they're trying to change it, maybe there should be a conversation there. Additionally, there's always more search engines/facilities that could be used if someone goes looking, maintaining a safe mode for all of those might be difficult.
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 13•5 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #12)
Although this is mainly about search, I think there's a wider part of this about how to lock down user settings. Hence I'm moving this across to the general component.
Some of this could, today, be performed by a user deploying as an enterprise instance with locked-down preferences. Though to me, this feels more like a social issue - as far as I know, most major engines have safe search by default, so the need to "lock it" is to disallow someone to change it, if they're trying to change it, maybe there should be a conversation there. Additionally, there's always more search engines/facilities that could be used if someone goes looking, maintaining a safe mode for all of those might be difficult.
None of the major search engines have a safe search that is enforced and unmodifiable by defaul, they set safe search to moderate by default and even if they did set it to strict by default the setting is a user preference and can easily be turned off.
The case I am presenting is to build Safe Search into the browser as an installation preference so you can choose whether to enforce Safe Search to Strict or not, if not then Firefox does nothing new, if you choose to enforce safe search this means that all searches are safe (strict) and the setting cannot be changed in the browser settings, eliminating any complexity like using plugins which require an admin setting and password protection and as I explained is not a viable option to implement a safe search feature. You could market this as SafeFox for schools and educational establishments as opposed to Firefox so people know the difference. This is suc a small feature but it can make a big difference and it would help promote this great product and surely increase its market share since people and organisations such as these are more likely to trust Mozilla over any commercial browser produced by companies who are only interested in harvesting data.
|
||
Updated•5 years ago
|
|
|
||
Comment 14•5 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #12)
Although this is mainly about search, I think there's a wider part of this about how to lock down user settings. Hence I'm moving this across to the general component.
Egh, I missed this comment before moving, but either way - there's no active work on Fx::General, I think the search team needs to determine how to prio this, so I moved it back.
|
|
||
Updated•5 years ago
|
|
||
Comment 15•3 years ago
|
||
Hi, I think that this bug is no longer valid in the face of the latest changes on the browser. If I'm mistaken, please reopen it.
Regards, Flor.
|
|
||
Updated•3 years ago
|
|
|
||
Comment 16•3 years ago
|
||
I think this is an interesting idea to explore at some stage.
|
|
||
Updated•3 years ago
|
|
||
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
|
||
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
||
Comment 17•10 months ago
|
||
We should consider this, but not at browser level.
This have to be something like "Do Not Track", nowadays safe search is enabled by default on search engines, in private browsing users have to disable it everytime. I wrote a script on greasyfork to do it automatically but it can't be a long term solution (there is no standard), but something like "Be Family Friendly" with 0 -> off, 1 -> default, 2 -> strict could help if supported.
It's only a suggestion because governments are pushing age verifications and browser/device-side flag could do the job, something like "Adult": 0 -> child, 1 -> minor, 2 -> adult that parents can set to be changed only with admin rights and that websites can requests only with permission could help.
This is not something that firefox can do alone, we need a standard and I don't know how to make it. Maybe it's not even a good idea but I don't want to sing-up/log-in everywhere everytime.
Description
•