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

Cuireadh an snáithe seo sa chartlann. Cuir ceist nua má tá cabhair uait.

Firefox browsing failure after upgrade to 126.0 (64-bit)

  • 5 fhreagra
  • 0 leis an bhfadhb seo
  • 24 views
  • Freagra is déanaí ó astroman133

more options

Firefox automatically updated itself to version 126.0 (64-bit) and it was unable to display any web sites.

First I disabled Mozilla VPN but that did not fix my issue. Next, I disabled Microsoft Defender firewall software to no effect.

Finally I updated the shortcut to Firefox on my taskbar to launch the browser. This fixed my issue.

Hopefully, this will save other users from the same pain.

Firefox automatically updated itself to version 126.0 (64-bit) and it was unable to display any web sites. First I disabled Mozilla VPN but that did not fix my issue. Next, I disabled Microsoft Defender firewall software to no effect. Finally I updated the shortcut to Firefox on my taskbar to launch the browser. This fixed my issue. Hopefully, this will save other users from the same pain.

Athraithe ag NoahSUMO ar

All Replies (5)

more options

Thank you for your report. Did you un-pin and re-pin the shortcut, or did you have to make some kind of edits to it? If you could detail the steps, that would be helpful.

more options

I unpinned the Firefox shortcut from the task bar and expected it to be somewhere on my desktop. It wasn't so I pinned a new shortcut from the Firefox executable back to the task bar.

more options

Thanks. I wonder why the old one stopped working? Strange!

more options

I wondered if the old version had a different executable name or was installed in a different folder.

more options

No, on further reflection, that could not be it because the executable was launched.

IDK.