Michael Robinson wrote: > I want safe mode to be closed to the average person. If one must enter > a password to get into safe mode, that will work. Changing the source > code of firefox is an extreme option that will make it harder to upgrade > when new releases come out. Is there any standard way to protect > against safe mode abuse? Procon Latte is a popular plugin I suspect, > but what's the point of it if anyone behind it can pop into safe mode > and remove it? I am surprised that the author of Procon Latte hasn't > addressed the safe mode abuse issue. Ideally, the developers who are > going to release the next version of firefox should address the safe > mode abuse issue.
Safe mode exists for a good reason - to prevent Firefox from becoming totally borked by third-party extension code. So while in your particular situation it poses a security risk, I guarantee if it were disabled by default, a far greater percentage of the user base would be inconvenienced. It's a trade-off. Procon Latte is likely a good solution for users who do not have the technical know-how or motivation to try running Firefox in safe mode. Content filters are best deployed at the network level, e.g. as a firewall service. Otherwise you're constantly playing a cat and mouse game with other applications the user could install or run to circumvent the content filtering - including by using things such as bootable CDs or USB drives. Scott -- Scott Garman sgarman at zenlinux dot com _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
