You can't think of an enterprise that doesn't want all of its web browsing metadata collected by third parties? Some enterprises are much more security-conscious than that. I have seen protected paper trash bins in a research lab and office buildings with X-ray scanners (mainly for electronic devices, not weapons).

Governments come to mind. European ones, especially.

There's already Island browser that competes in this space. Plenty of companies pay for browser control that goes beyond what the normal policies can provide.

[dead]

Yes. You have some control by including/excluding certain sites from the rules, i.e. you could exclude common shopping sites from the CC rules, and we imagine most folks trying to stop (accidental) exfil through AI chatbots are going to block most common providers there.

Warning (instead of blocking) is possible. Due to the security logging (plus, if wanted, SIEM integration) you get the flagging.

Can you run data through a local or corporately-situated LLM instructed to "Assess whether this looks potentially sensitive" via a given set of rules, and flag it to the user or a supervisor to proceed/abort?

Not in the first version, but this is an area we are working in.

what kind of hooks and feedback/UI interaction is available for third party integrations?

We support the standard SDK for this which is also used by Chromium based products:

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2025/03/improving-firefox-stabilit...

That's how Trellix and Broadcom integrate with it as well.

[flagged]

I don't know. Like another comment here says, some companies have been blocking Firefox because it's difficult to bend it to their will. For them, a browser has always meant one thing: Chrome. With Firefox entering the mix now, it's going to be 'yet another browser when we already have one'. Most corporate admins, I'd think, will say 'no, thanks'.

I once had to work with group policy FF that prevented me from configuring the way FF started. I wanted it to keep the session, but instead it always started with a blank slate. Mind-blowingly stupid.

There are no such plans.

(Regardless of one's feelings about generative AI, I think some features like local translation or alt text are too nice to be labeled "LLM shit", but I admit I am biased)

You can already turn everything off under Settings -> AI Control. Personally I keep Translations on so I can translate locally instead of calling external services.

They list this as a feature in the submission page.

No, why would you think that?

No. Are you thinking that was a feature intended to appeal to corporate use or something? I'm pretty sure it was all about AI backlash. It's still a popular setting to have available. (I have no idea how many people actually use it.)

Someone dropped the following link, which seems to have way more detail than the press releases: https://www.firefox.com/en-US/firefox/enterprise/158.0/relea...

It looks like they do actually offer that as a feature: "Employees can access internal company sites and web apps from personal devices without a device-level VPN"

Edit: To give proper credit, the link is from Heise.de

Firefox Enterprise does include similar functionality :-)

Hopefully they still can. Healthy Firefox == healthy browser market.

I'm working on a demanding project that has performance as a fundamental requirement. Unfortunately Firefox turned out to be disappointing: audio/video codecs not supported or supported badly, and decidedly poor performance. Chrome instead is decidedly on another level. My opinion is that firefox prefers the road of features, neglecting the care of performance, and maybe this also depends on the fact that Mozilla doesn't have a big company behind it like chrome has google. It's a big problem, because on this road I don't see a great future for firefox, and we would end up on a road of de facto monopoly, which is not good for anyone.

Haven't had any reason to not use firefox since quantum

No such thing. Business, like history, goes in circles.

a) it's much easier to work with b) you have much more monitoring possibilities c) it adds a pile of features d) you can host all supporting services (sync, updates, telemetry, etc) on premise - if you want

The current policies are not very enterprise-friendly yet.

Some settings are flat out refused (for "security reasons"). And with each new update there are a few new popups / invitations to try this new feature / re-enabling the v2 of the thing of which the v1 was already opted out in the policy. And it seems like you cannot apply new policy while the browser is running - meaning it cannot be used to roll out hotfixes without interrupting the work of currently unaffected workstations.

And then there is the syncing. If you want to manage & sync history, bookmarks and the password managers content.. you are probably going to find that easier by overriding the builtin features with 3rd-party extensions, as the builtin sync feature is very much tailored to the needs of privately owned devices and one-device-at-a-time usage patterns.