DADavideNL·Nov 12, 2025
That’s most probably a conflict with another extension…
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/347
In Firefox expands fingerprint protectionsstoically
temporary-containers
TypeScript2018–2025
stoically / temporary-containers
temporary-containers
Firefox Add-on that lets you open automatically managed disposable containers
19Distinct people
21Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
905GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Firefox Add-on that lets you open automatically managed disposable containers
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use was verified in the last source check.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
- mozilla/multi-account-containers · linked in 2 of the same discussions
Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 1:49:46 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by year21 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2018-04-18 01:11:23 UTC to 2025-11-12 06:07:51 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 2019 | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| 2021 | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2023 | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| 2024 | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2025 | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 0 | 4 |
What Hacker News says
21 sourcesstoically, the maintainer and creator of this extension unfortunately passed in early 2023. There's a new fork available[0], linked from github[1].
I briefly discussed this extension and how to proceed after the passing of a maintainer with Mozilla staff in their Extensions and People teams at FOSDEM this year, but there was no real procedures in place at the time of our chat.
[0]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/temporary-con...
[1]: https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/634
In Firefox expands fingerprint protectionsIf you haven't seen it, there's also https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... (https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers MIT) when you don't care about the containers but do care that their browsing context is isolated. The screenshot even shows the handy "delete temporary container 15 minutes after the last tab closes")
Actually, sorry, it seems to be https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... and https://github.com/GodKratos/temporary-containers) based solely on the language present in the add-on and commit history
In What's New with Firefox 142Temporary Containers: Status of repository owner
1 points · Open discussionalas "TC is now official unmaintened, hoping for a fork"
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/618
In Privacy Badger: A browser extension that learns to block invisible trackersThe Temporary Containers extension is unmaintained:
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/618
In Using extra Firefox profiles to make my life betterThe creator and maintainer of that extension has passed away in January.
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/618
In AI real-time human full-body photo generatorUnfortunately the containers are all using the same fingerprint: https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/51
In Multi-Account ContainersThe answer is using Temporary Contains with "Automatic Mode" enabled in the preferences.
I just opened a new tab normally, with no shortcut, and it automatically created a fresh temp container "tmp2". I logged into HN and replied to this comment. I will close the tab now, and in 5 minutes, due to another Temp Containers setting, everything in the temp container will be wiped.
The whole silly "No Container" business goes away entirely.
See https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/wiki/Autom...
In Facebook Container ExtensionThank you for your suggestions. I've been considering what to do about my Firefox setup for some time (switching to ESR vs one of the forks, which I have to research first). Thing is, I'm using a heavily-customized profile with lots of extensions, Violentmonkey [1] userscripts, containers (including Containerise [2], and Temporary Containers [3]), and a custom user.js (based on [4]), so I should also revisit the settings for all of these at the same time as it's been a while since I last did so. It's all on my to-do list but as the current setup works well, there's always something more urgent to do instead.
1. https://violentmonkey.github.io/
2. https://github.com/kintesh/containerise
3. https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers
4. https://github.com/pyllyukko/user.js
The LTSC suggestion is also good. I'm already using a heavily-
Read the rest
debloated LTSC with lots of unnecessary packages removed (including the hidden ones, which are not supposed to be officially removable), and all kinds of customizations for privacy, security, performance, and convenience. While I'm satisfied with my setup (automated with custom scripts I've been maintaining since Windows 8), the number of hoops one has to go through to have their computer do what the user wants and nothing else, or a "User-Agent" that gives actual agency to the user these days is truly astonishing, and makes the goal unattainable for most people.
I wish they fixed the long standing, annoying sync bug that makes Firefox download 7000+ containers every once in a while. Some of us hosed our sync accounts in one way or another (through the container duplication bug in m-a-c itself [1] or the temporary containers extension [2]) and it's impossible to recover - once you reach the storage quota on the sync server, the sync server refuses all write operations and delete call apparently counts as a write.
[1] https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/1...
[2] https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/371
In Multi-Account Containers to “Exchange messages with programs other than Firefox”Here is the issue if you are interested. It's still not closed:
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/issues/371
In Facebook Container for FirefoxIn temporary containers you can set up what should happen on different actions (left click, ctrl+click, etc) and different domains.
https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/wiki/Globa...
In Facebook Container for FirefoxI reworded my comment. My point remains in that a lot of possible issues disappear if I just choose to destroy the entire directory. There is a clear difference between one Chrome instance (and all its associated windows/tabs) segmented into one profile directory and in-process segmentation. The issues at [1] seem to invoke unexpected behavior in that you're asking for a new temporary container but you can't know ahead of time if that's what you will get. I'm writing "seem" because it's not clear from the description how that interaction works. They could be better worded.
With segmentation enforced at instance boundary (rather than in-instance), there is no unexpected behavior of this sort. All links open in the segmented instance that the browser window/tab you're using belongs to. If you want a new container, you start a new instance a
Read the rest
nd you know that's exactly what you will get. There is no possible "fail open" result. Note that I'm not saying the Firefox behavior you described is a major issue, just that it proves you can have unexpected scenarios.
Moreover, jedberg is correct in that cross-profile data leaking is possible (partly what I meant by "implementing profiles" properly), except that it's very easy to see if that's happening without auditing Chrome. Use a tool that records all filesystem operations (e.g. dtrace on macOS).
At the end of the day, I choose one set of trade-offs over another.
[1] https://github.com/stoically/temporary-containers/wiki/Isola...
Showing the 15 most recent of 21 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.