Seconded.
Perchance a bit of ‘crowd funding’?
I am game and pretty sure more than enough others will be.
1 Like
I agree ephemeral storage would be sufficient. “Temporary containers” does this on Firefox. But the storag still need to persist, to avoid needing to re-sign in by saving cookies forever.
Also a dedicated “delete data with tab” would be great.
2 Likes
Adding another vote and voice to this feature request. I spend many of my days bouncing around various AWS account consoles, web apps for different clients, and dev/test versions of different apps. For this reason, Containers (and by extension the contextualIdentities JS API) in FireFox are a killer feature and are the only reason I keep going back to them over Brave. I would love to see this get implemented soon!
2 Likes
Brave is really good as has Qwant listed in the search engine options, it has fantastic tracking and blocking control, I prefer to use it on PC, Linux Mint and Brax2 cellphone - BUT… It hacks me off that there is no tab containers option. Therefore when needing to open all 5 of my different protonmail emails in Brave PC it isn’t possible.
What is interesting that on the Brave cellphone browser, multiple different email accounts can be opened IN THE SAME TAB GROUP, not even in separate tabs -
So… back to Firefox I go. Not even TOR has the Firefox tab container option.
Brave @kdenhartog - This is a HUGE issue, individual Tab info streaming, 80 or so comments do not show the importance of it, the bulk of people are just too lazy to find out more.
Stay real Be free
FK
1 Like
Out of curiosity are people wanting to just be able to have multiple logins in the same profile or is this about other additional features? The reason I ask is I see there’s extensions like MultiLogin (some reports it’s broken and may be unmaintained now - so likely not a permanent solution) and SessionBox One (has a cost) that achieve some of these features already. When combined with Brave’s fingerprinting protection that comes with shields and our work on ephemeral storage I’m not seeing anything beyond just a functional multiLogin feature.
- Just containers would be great
- Containers plus some other features (reply to this comment with specific features)
- Some other feature (reply to this comment with what feature you’re looking for)
0
voters
I’ve been poking around at trying to port Mozilla’s containers over too, but it seems we’d need to expose some additional background script APIs like ContextualIdentities to make this possible and that seems bigger than taking the approach that SessionBox and MultiLogin did. Hence my question about understanding what are the key features people are wanting and what use cases they’re after.
@bitin @Flying_Kiwi @ApatheticRiku @NoMoreFirefox @containerspls @Overtake1625 @nandastone @TitaniumCoder477 @jumbonugget @jaybird and whoever else. I’m tagging all of you because I’m making the assumption you didn’t set this topic to track all replies and activity. Wanting to point out the recent reply from Kyle here asking for more details on what people are looking for.
Would be great if you all can vote in the poll and provide replies with more info on the requests.
3 Likes
Personally, I think just containers would be fine. But it would be great if the containers were somehow virtualized. That may not be the right word. What I am trying to say is that these containers should be able to open in one same window. Maybe you can have something similar to Vivaldi Workspaces where workspaces would basically be containers.
I can see how it would be hard to implement, so I am fine even with the containers feature (no matter how it is implemented).
Yeah one window makes sense as a key differentiating UI of containers versus profiles. Are there specific use cases you want to address here that is easier with containers rather than managing separate profiles? E.g. is it that you’re looking for temporary login capabilities, new fresh tab for shopping cart isolation, multiple persistent logins, delinking browsing usage, etc? Each one of these requires a different amount of work and if we can start with one or two key use cases that makes this a bit more manageable to prioritize.
Kind of like the 2nd thing you mentioned,
Also something like multiple app feature in android, where you can have multiple different instances of same app so you can use multiple accounts but it would be for websites in this case. I think that’s what you meant by
That sounds like both use cases you’re looking for are addressed by the MultiLogin extension I mentioned above. Can you install that and try to see if it works for what you’d like to achieve?
I am aware of MultiLogin but it hasn’t been working perfectly since quite some time. There are problems like infinite login loops and redirect loops which makes it unusable for me. It has this problem especially with Microsoft Suite which is basically what I need this feature for in the first place.
Understood, I wasn’t thinking of it as a way to say “hey just use MultiLogin” since I see it has some issues and isn’t being well maintained anymore. My main goal is to understand if it didn’t have some of these bugs does that address the use cases you’re after? In the case of using Microsoft Suite what is it that you’re doing?
If it doesn’t have those bugs, then yes MultiLogin definitely covers all the use cases for me. As for Microsoft Suite, I was talking about signing in with multiple accounts to access OneDrive, Outlook, etc. It’s annoying always having to switch accounts just to get a file that I have stored on another account.
I just wish Microsoft ecosystem could fix handling multiple accounts and make it easy like Google has.
1 Like
Understanding that others have different use cases for containers, I really don’t have any myself so my preference is for “none”. If Brave developers decide to implement a containers feature, my vote would be for straight containers with no other features. My view as an “old school” browser user is based on keeping Brave as bug-free and bloat-free as possible. 
2 Likes
@Brave Dev Team — thank you so much for considering this feature seriously.
My use case is both for general and work purposes.
General
- using containers for compartmentalization of different areas of my online activity, especially keeping known data-siphons separate (such as facebook)
- using containers for multiple logins into same services
- browser/addon being smart enough to know which domain/subdomain should be opened in which container
Work specific
- Multi-Account Containers in Firefox, which I currently use, allow me to have separate VPN connections per container — which is something I rely heavily for work purposes
- FF works fine in general, but comes short while using Google at google.com in different containers — I’d pay more than what I pay now for a more stable solution
- FF requires additional app for VPN to function, and this app can not be launched as a background service — I’d like it to be either a background service or backed into the browser
Wishlist
- it would be helpful for my use case to be able to configure additional settings per container — such as user-agent string, device emulation or internet connection throttling — and for these settings to persist per container
- there are apps such as OpenIn or Choosy, that, when chosen as default system browser, allow opening links in different target browsers, depending on various user settings — right now I can define which browser and which profile a browser should use (in Chrome-based browsers), but it would be super-awesome to also be able to specify target container
Once more, thanks for taking the time to consider this.
2 Likes
Thanks, this is helpful. Some of these are new features too it looks like which is good to know about, but I’m not certain how possible all of these things will be. Things like “such as user-agent string, device emulation or internet connection throttling” are advanced features that cut deeply into chromium engine code in a way that I very much doubt would make it in an MVP of this.
To be clear, the reason I’m asking about this is to figure out to what degree people are really looking for a full replacement to containers versus just key features. Full replacement of containers does look difficult to achieve. When an experienced chrome engineer took a look at this previously they estimated this would take years to achieve this if backed onto profiles because of how tied together profiles and UI are.
So my motivation really stems from trying to understand if we could get away with just implementing some key features and surgically insert them to get container like functionality or if what people really want is beyond the scope of what we can prioritize at the moment. From what I can tell you’re really after a full container approach based on the features you requested. I agree this would be awesome, but I want to make sure it’s known that I’m not trying to hand out hopium here by weighing in to get a better understanding of what people want.
You are correct, indeed. Firefox has its Multi-account Containers extension to provide some of what @bartek is suggesting, and has not in-built this feature into its browser code. What he envisions is even more functionality than the extension currently provides.
Thank you for this effort.
For me, the use would be for multiple persistent logins, without needing to verify the logins on the same browser if possible. (For Facebook business and personal profiles specifically.)
I tried MultiLogin, and at least initially it allows multiple logins, but needs new logins and authentication on startup. This isn’t actually too bad anymore since FB implemented several ways to confirms logins beyond the authenticator app.
This is the only feature that prevents me from switching to Brave as my daily driver.
Maybe I am a geek but I utilize shortcut bookmarks in firefox that open up urls in containers.
I make a bookmark “gm” that opens up gmail in my personal mail container.
I also make a shortcut “gmw” that opens up gmail in my work container.
When I type these shortcuts in the address bar the browser opens the urls up in the appropriate container I have set for those shortcuts.
What I would love to see from a Brave implementation perspective would be a way to emulate that but also attach a profile to it.
So an alias that opens some url in some specific profile in some specific cookie container that shares cookies only with things I want it to share cookies with.
This would be really useful.
1 Like
Hi all, just wondering if folks know about Forgetful Browsing feature on Brave Desktop? On a site, you can click the Shields icon > “Forget me when I close this site”. Then, when you close the last tab open for that site, all data gets wiped. Every time you open a new tab for that site, it opens with all existing storage for site wiped.
Does that at least fulfill the temporary container usecase that people have?