Join the AMA (Ask Me Anything) with the Firefox leadership team to celebrate Firefox 20th anniversary and discuss Firefox’s future on Mozilla Connect. Mark your calendar on Thursday, November 14, 18:00 - 20:00 UTC!

This site will have limited functionality while we undergo maintenance to improve your experience. If an article doesn't solve your issue and you want to ask a question, we have our support community waiting to help you at @FirefoxSupport on Twitter and/r/firefox on Reddit.

Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

Hierdie gesprek is in die argief. Vra asseblief 'n nuwe vraag as jy hulp nodig het.

isn't firefox's remote execution capability on linux a security violation?

  • 1 antwoord
  • 1 het hierdie probleem
  • 1 view
  • Laaste antwoord deur John99

more options

If I run firefox remotely on a different machine over a secure connection without using the --no-remote option, it starts locally instead.

Also, if I have a secure connection to a remote machine where firefox is running (without --no-remote), and I start firefox locally, the remote instance paints a window on the screen.

How does that work? Are only X facilities used? Which ones? Also, can someone point me to the files in the source version that implement this functionality, and whether there is a compile-time variable to disable it? A related question - if I build my own version according to the mozilla directions, can I expect it to be as fast as the pre-compiled version?


In the first case, take this example:

  $ ssh -fX remote xterm -ls
  $ firefox &

When I start firefox remotely in this configuration, I expect that it asks X to open a window and X sees that the graphic server is remote and paints a window there. Without firefox knowing about it.

I consider it a trojan horse that firefox should look around to determine what my configuration is. This is exactly what I don't want applications to do.

At the very least - i.e. without running a general inventory - it seems that firefox needs to ask if the graphics server is remote or not, and if so, it has to attempt to start an arbitrary executable (but hopefully only firefox) on the server machine.

That that kind of activism doesn't seem like infringement to others is amazing to me.

If I run firefox remotely on a different machine over a secure connection without using the --no-remote option, it starts locally instead. Also, if I have a secure connection to a remote machine where firefox is running (without --no-remote), and I start firefox locally, the remote instance paints a window on the screen. How does that work? Are only X facilities used? Which ones? Also, can someone point me to the files in the source version that implement this functionality, and whether there is a compile-time variable to disable it? A related question - if I build my own version according to the mozilla directions, can I expect it to be as fast as the pre-compiled version? In the first case, take this example: $ ssh -fX remote xterm -ls $ firefox & When I start firefox remotely in this configuration, I expect that it asks X to open a window and X sees that the graphic server is remote and paints a window there. Without firefox knowing about it. I consider it a trojan horse that firefox should look around to determine what my configuration is. This is exactly what I don't want applications to do. At the very least - i.e. without running a general inventory - it seems that firefox needs to ask if the graphics server is remote or not, and if so, it has to attempt to start an arbitrary executable (but hopefully only firefox) on the server machine. That that kind of activism doesn't seem like infringement to others is amazing to me.

All Replies (1)

more options

It does not look as if anyone on this forum is going to answer. Developers are unlikely to see a post on this forum.

I suggest you either try to find a more suitable forum

where developers may find the post, or even consider filing a bug for this.