Hello All,

I have just purchased DefenseWall and I have one question, and a observation.

My question relates to running Defense Wall with the current build of Firefox 2.0,
my mouse seems to stick when scrolling pages, or clicking links, I do not see
this same behaviour when using I.E 7 or Avant browsers with DW and so I
wondered if this is normal for Defense Wall and Mozilla browsers ?

My observation relates to launching a browser while Defense Walls protection
was disabled, if you renable DW protection after your browser is running
DW does not see it, so you have to close your browser renable DW and
than relaunch your browser and this could pose a problem for computer
dummies like myself.

Thanks for this wonderful product am really enjoying it.

I have a similar problem with DW & FF2.

Also add that entering text in forms (like this), is a PITA as it will freeze randomly..

1. What the FF extensions do you have installed?

2. Send me DefenseWall's log file (it is defensewall_log.log file within the directory you have installed DW).

Hello Mr. Rabinovich, thanks for your response,
and thank you tilb9 for your confirmation.

The Firefox extensions I have installed for FF 2.0
are Adblock Plus, Adblock Filterset G. Updater, and
EasyList, All in One Gestures, All in One Sidebar,
CookieCuller, DrWeb Anti Virus Link Checker, Flash
Block, FoxyTunes, ImageZoom, McAfee Site Advisor,
Media Player Connectivity, Mr. Tech Local Install,
No Script, Safe Cache, Snag It, and Translate.

As til9b notes I also experience the same problem
when entering text as it freezes randomly, and when
am doing normal web browsing in FF 2.0 mouse sticks
and freezes on webpages, text, and hyperlinks, and
this has only occured since I installed Defense Wall
and I will send you a copy of my DW log.

I was wondering if it was also possible to add a
feature along the lines of if DW protection has
been disabled by a user, and you launch a browser
that DF could pop up a alert and say Defense Wall
is currently disabled, please click here to renable
protection so as to remind a user that DF needs to
be renabled for protection.

Thanks

Hi Ilya

Experiencing the same slowdowns, mouse stopping etc. with DW and Ffx 2.0.
Disable DW protection and it is much better but not completely which leads me to believe it is partly Ffx problem; perhaps an updated extension.

Why 291 Ffx browser sessions in the Add/Remove Untrusted?

Here we go:
"Firefox 2 introduces session store, a new feature that makes it possible for extensions to easily save and restore data across Firefox sessions. There is a simple API that lets extensions access the session store feature.


One key scenario in which supporting this feature can be crucial for an extension: Firefox 2 lets users undo the closing of tabs. In order to properly restore your extension's state when a tab is restored, it needs to use the session store API's setTabValue() method to save any data it will need in order to restore its state, and then call getTabValue() to retrieve the previous setting when the tab is restored.

The Session Store API is implemented using the nsISessionStore interface. "


DW is picking up every "session" in Untrusted.

http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Session_store_API

When were also talking about the new GUI - is it possible to have 2separate windowa in the GUI where default + by user added untrusted processes are shown in one "add/remove untrusted" window and session added entries to untrusted are shown in another "remove sessions untrusted" window. Would that enhance the ease of use and understanding of DW? Can it be done?

When I added FF to untrusted (has removed it since) I had to move it up through over one hundred session-entries cause I didnt want the .exe to sit in the middle of all those entries. I could have removed the session entries first but I felt I am on uncertain ground here,
Same if an update would add new default process to untrusted it might show up on row 88 in add/remove untrusted and I might not even be able to realize its an important entry - so during a clean-up of untrusted list I might remove a default entry!?

I am nontech user and I always try to see it from that users perspective.

Two tabs leading to two separate windows under add/remove untrusted
1: "Default and user added untrusted process - add/remove"
2: "Session added untrusted processes - remove only"
Plus use free space to explain to the user how he/she shall work with this.

I am not a programmer so this will have to be my contribution towards a solution to this "problem"".

Best Regards

Don't understand what do you mean under "session". Why separate applications from built-in list and others?

Hello
I have a comment regarding Firefox 2.0, as well. I just started a trial today, and noticed that when I shut down Firefox, then start it up again some time later I get a message that states Firefox was closed unexpectedly and do I want to restart the previous session or start a new one, or words to that effect. Is this normal?
So far this seems like a very simple product to use.
Thank you

Ilya - as always I am in deep waters when it comes to tech stuff.

What I mean is that entries coming automatically from internetsessions or downloads etc shouldnt show in the same window/list as default and user added modules/processes. That would keep the "clutter" separated from the interesting untrusted list.

At the same time I must say that - for me - the amount of clutter is significantly less now. I only use IE, not FF or any other browser that might cause "clutter"entries in the untrusted list.

If you think separeting like I suggest has a value and its doable with a reasonable amount of work, why not try it and see how users react to it. I know I would very much like to easily be able to distinguish those two types of untrusted entries.

An untrusted list with say 30-100 entries is totally confusing to the enduser. He will have full jobb knowing whats default and what he shall add himself. He will need a clear overview.

Best Regards

2 capatt

FF 2.0 issue is known and new driver is already under test. Don't warry- this will be fixed very soon, I just need to be sure that the problem is fixed.

2 Rivalen

Well, I understand your reasons. Maybe, I may do other thing- I may select with color (blue, for instance) the elements added into the list from built-in list and by the user themself. This would give more additional information to users and there won't need to decrease each list's size.