1613357 - creates new profile after update. terminal services related?

Status: UNCONFIRMED

(Toolkit :: Startup and Profile System, defect, P3)

Description

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1601287 +++
sorry for not giving any further information about the original bug report.

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:71.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/71.0

Steps to reproduce:

hello.
what we're using:
several Client PC's working on a terminal server which provides firefox and the maintenance service.
what happend:
firefox received an update. firefox was started.

Actual results:

after starting firefox a message box appeared which said that a new profile must be created. i could either create a new profile or just quit firefox.
firefox opened with a new profile und no bookmarks,history or whatever.
the original profile was still in the folder AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles.

Expected results:

firefox should have kept the profile und user data after the update and shouldn't force a new proflle

Comment 1

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

Asked by Dave Townsend [:mossop]:' What was the install location of Firefox before and after the update? Looking at the compatibility.ini file from the old and new profiles would be helpful.'

Here is what I found in the compatibility.ini files from 3 different users.
FIRST USER:

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=72.0.2_20200117190643/20200117190643
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfilesqw356cxa.default-release-5-1580717539211 // 05.02.2020

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=72.0.2_20200117190643/20200117190643
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfiles6ni1j2sm.default-release-4 // 29.01.2020

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=70.0.1_20191030021342/20191030021342
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfileszm7awtih.default-release-3 // vom 21.11.2019

SECOND USER:

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=72.0.2_20200117190643/20200117190643
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersuserxyAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfileshd2ynkbl.default-release-5 // vom 05.02.2020

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=72.0.2_20200117190643/20200117190643
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersuserxAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfilesz7h0h9ge.default-release-4 // 24.01.2020

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=70.0.1_20191030021342/20191030021342
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersuserxyAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfiles8fqlnptx.default-release-3 // 20.11.2019

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=70.0.1_20191030021342/20191030021342
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser
C:UsersuserxyAppDataRoamingMozillaFirefoxProfiles9mdt1oaw.default-release-2 // 11.11.2019

THIRD USER:

[Compatibility]
LastVersion=68.0.1_20190717172542/20190717172542
LastOSABI=WINNT_x86_64-msvc
LastPlatformDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefox
LastAppDir=C:Program FilesMozilla Firefoxrowser

mozilla maintainance service automaticly updates firefox on the terminal server for each user

Comment 2

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

These files do not seem correct. Can you please attach copies of them to the bug report rather than copying and pasting their contents?

Also for the future you can just re-open a bug when you're ready to provide the requested details.

Comment 3

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

Attachment: compatibility01.ini

Comment 4

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

Attachment: compatibility02.ini

Comment 5

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

Attachment: compatibility03.ini

Comment 6

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

Attachment: compatibility04.ini

several compability.ini files from affected users

Comment 7

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

What is the relationship between these compatibility.ini files?

Comment 8

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #7)

What is the relationship between these compatibility.ini files?

These files are from 3 different users who are affected by the problem.

Comment 9

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

(In reply to manuel.rodrigues.gomes from comment #8)

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #7)

What is the relationship between these compatibility.ini files?

These files are from 3 different users who are affected by the problem.

Are some from before the issue and some from after?

Comment 10

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #9)

(In reply to manuel.rodrigues.gomes from comment #8)

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #7)

What is the relationship between these compatibility.ini files?

These files are from 3 different users who are affected by the problem.

Are some from before the issue and some from after?

Yes, these files are from yesterday.
The issue occurs (i think) after updates.
Some users have up to 6 different firefox profiles.
Everytime this happens the user loses his/her bookmarks, history...

Comment 11

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

What I need to see is the compatibility.ini of the profile the user uses before the update and the compatibility.ini for the new profile that gets created after the update.

Comment 12

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #11)

What I need to see is the compatibility.ini of the profile the user uses before the update and the compatibility.ini for the new profile that gets created after the update.

file 01 and 02 belong to the same user. file03 and 04 belong to another user.
file 02 and 04 are older than the others.

Comment 13

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

The priority flag is not set for this bug.
:mossop, could you have a look please?

For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.

Comment 14

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

Based on the compatibility files this isn't related to updates, suggests there is something broken with the profiles.ini files themselves.

Comment 15

[manuel.rodrigues.gomes]

(In reply to Dave Townsend [:mossop] (he/him) from comment #14)

Based on the compatibility files this isn't related to updates, suggests there is something broken with the profiles.ini files themselves.

okay so what do you think is the best was to proceed now?

Comment 16

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

At the moment I have no way to reproduce this issue and there is no suggestion for what is triggering the problem. Ideally we'd be able to get a snapshot of a users state immediately before the issue occurs and then be able to reproduce that on a test machine but I'm not sure that that is very likely to work. There could be something specific to terminal services here that might be causing it but I can't see what it might be.

Comment 18

[ReidTech]

Yup, same behaviour, I would not assume the same cause, though the environment (TS) is similar.

This is really really bad for Firefox if we cannot find a way to fix this.

I guess I'm going to have to donate my time to perform the QA required. As it looks like the assigned staff does not have the resources required to do the job.

I can't really rollback and roll forward Firefox versions and play with user profiles on a production corporate network though. The users need to get thier work done.

Does Mozilla not have a terminal services test environment? How much would it cost you to set up a basic one? Perhaps we could have a fundraiser?

The Firefox build environment is such a pig though. Lib dependency hell, it takes days to configure and build all the projects it depends on.

I will stew on a way to fix this for you. We need Firefox now more than ever, and this issue will kill it for business use if we do not fix it.

Perhaps I could rent a cheap virtual server cluster and setup a build and test environment for you, then provide a login so you have the resources to work on this.

Any of these ideas seem helpful?

Comment 19

[ReidTech]

Actually, thinking on this some more, in order to properly test this, I would require control of your update servers or some way to replace them with identical functionality in a custom FF build.

Is that possible? Is the code and config for your update servers available?

Comment 20

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

Unless you have a staging environment for your systems you probably just need to wait for the next Firefox update. Ideally I would like to see the entire contents of %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Firefox before an update and then after running the updated version and seeing the profile lost. Should be straightforward to do with a test user account.

Comment 21

[ReidTech]

You are still asking me to do your software QA on my live production corporate network. I'm sorry but that's not acceptable to me (nor should it be to you either).

Unless Mozilla can get it together (and based on what I see lately, it is not going to happen, they're concerned with marketing data, not the code), and if I want to continue to use firefox, it is obvious that I will have to fix it myself.

Yes, I will have to build an expensive and time consuming staging environment (build, update servers, custom ff build, clients) in order to fix it for you.

But you see, I have the rest of my business to run. When will I sleep? My clients will not pay me for this.

Comment 22

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

(In reply to ReidTech from comment #21)

You are still asking me to do your software QA on my live production corporate network. I'm sorry but that's not acceptable to me (nor should it be to you either).

I'm afraid that for issues that only appear in non-standard environments we often have to rely on the reporters helping us gather enough information to be able to understand what is happening.

Yes, I will have to build an expensive and time consuming staging environment (build, update servers, custom ff build, clients) in order to fix it for you.

There is no need to test this with custom builds of Firefox or custom update servers. In fact I'd prefer it if you didn't, that only serves to add noise to the data.

Comment 23

[ReidTech]

Fair enough. So you'd rather I wait.

Here's why I have a problem with that: search the bug tracker for profile bugs, there are dozens of them, years old, that are not even assigned, yet there are "bugs" in this tracker that are about user data collection (nothing to do with FF core code) that have been assigned.

If Mozilla is concerned about market share and competition, all the data collection in the world will not help if the product quality is bad.

Build a product of superior quality and it will dominate.

So why is this relevant in this discussion? You mention "non-standard environments".

Well, MS Terminal Services is now a "standard environment". Even before COVID companies have been moving to hosted remote desktops like crazy, now that COVID requires everybody to work from home for an indefinite period of time (permanently?) - well...

If you do not consider MS Terminal Services a standard environment, you are going to lose corporate market share.

The MUA (or whatever) user data collection will not help. Only fixing the code will.

And so I do not have the faith at this point that Mozilla can see the product anymore. The beancounters have too much control. Code needs to be controlled by coders, not managers concerned with social issues and sales data.

Look at it...

• Pocket (nobody wants it)
• TRR (hijacking corporate DNS to report it to cloudflare - completely unacceptable)
• Firefox accounts (nobody wants them)

Just build solid code and forget all the silly cruft. Focus on the actual browser functionality.

I know its silly to make this speech to you. The Mozilla leadership really needs to hear it before they finish killing Firefox. Maybe they will see it?

I will stew on whether to keep my clients on Firefox or to move to Edgium (Chrome is completely unacceptable for science or business). I'd really rather not - I want Firefox to be a solid and free as in speech product. I'm not sure if I will do it myself or not. I have a few major projects to finish.

Comment 24

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

Can you clarify exactly what your server is running and how applications are exposed to users? The windows folks are telling me that the product "Terminal Services" was renamed a number of years ago and Remote Desktop Services encompasses a number of different things.

Comment 25

[ReidTech]

OS: Windows Server 2012 Standard
Application: Remote Desktop Services

Remote Desktop Services primary function is to run an rdp (remote desktop protocol) server (Remote Desktop Session Host). The Windows Remote Desktop is similar to VNC or Xterm but different. What it does is provide a remote UI for a local user session. The Applications are delivered like any other, it runs on the computer/server in a user session. The windows server runs a service invoked thus:

C:\Windows\System32\svchost.exe -k termsvcs

The service listens on port 3389 for rdp client connections. When a client connects with the rdp client (mstsc.exe), they are presented a windows login, and once logged in are presented with their full user desktop in a window.

Imagine you are connecting to your (assuming) Ubuntu Gnome desktop that is running VNC. When you login, you see the desktop and UI. The user experience is essentially the same.

Remote Desktop Services may do other undocumented things, but what it does is run a Remote Desktop Session Host. Any other functions it has are ancillary to the actual remote desktop service.

Comment 26

[ReidTech]

Please tell me this is not related:
https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/04/11/1724209/mozilla-installs-scheduled-telemetry-task-on-windows-with-firefox-75
I note it runs as the active user. Of course, I will disable it everywhere.
Also, expect GDPR charges from EU countries. This kind of irresponsible behaviour could destroy Mozilla completely. I seriously doubt Mozilla could pay the fines for this kind of thing. Not like Google and Apple.

Also, note how fast this kind of thing gets posted every time you guys tack on some useless and unwanted junk:

https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2020/04/how-to-disable-firefox-75s-new-address-bar/

https://www.askvg.com/tip-disable-telemetry-and-data-collection-in-mozilla-firefox-quantum/

I had to disable it on my girlfriend's computer because it filters out porn sites from history and favorites and will not list them! Me, I'm disabling it, because the address bar should be the address bar and nothing more, DNS (not TRR) exists for a reason. Like WTF people?

This is beginning to look like sabotage from within. Seriously. Firefox is in serious danger.

I expect that many of the stuff that gets broken dates back to Netscape and you know what? That was all we needed.

Firefox would be best maintained my a full time staff of 6. No more, no less. That is all it should take. If it is taking more, then it is not a web browser that you are working on.

Apologies for the rant, but I am really worried about the future of Firefox at this point, and you have made a fool of me for recommending it as the primary browser for my corporate clients.

Every new version, I have to search the web annd dig out about:config to disable whatever ridiculous junk has been added in the latest build.

Please, I am begging. Just build a solid browser. Nothing else matters. Nothing.

Mozilla leadership needs to understand this. If they do not, then they need to be replaced with people who do.