[Request]A private tab panel can be added to the navigation bar?

[Felmon]

Description

Is it possible to support adding a privacy tab page panel in the element of the navigation bar? In this way, the privacy mode does not need to be opened in a new window but can be switched permanently in the sidebar.

And hope to add the function of automatic tab grouping according to domain name/website title

[emvaized]

I believe it is not possible, as each tab could not be private on it's own — only the whole window could be private.

As a workaround, you could use Firefox Containers to create a new separate container with no cookies and login data for websites, call it "Private", and use it for private browsing — just remember to not login anywhere. Or you could probably use something like Temporary Containers to create new containers on the go, and then create new panel in Sidebery and configure it to use these containers somehow.

[Felmon]

I believe it is not possible, as each tab could not be private on it's own — only the whole window could be private.

As a workaround, you could use Firefox Containers to create a new separate container with no cookies and login data for websites, call it "Private", and use it for private browsing — just remember to not login anywhere. Or you could probably use something like Temporary Containers to create new containers on the go, and then create new panel in Sidebery and configure it to use these containers somehow.

I tried the firefox container , but it seems to have the same container function as sidebery, only UA and proxy can be set, and there is no function to set a container without cookie and history. Can you teach me at your convenience?

[Felmon]

Or is it possible to add a configuration in the settings of the container or tab panel in sidebery: no history, no cookie, no...? make him like a private mode. @emvaized

[emvaized]

Firefox Containers are essentially a solution for separating cookies, you can read more about them here. However, if you want cookies in new container to not be saved, then you should better look at something like Temporary Containers, which creates fresh new containers on the go, acting essentialy like a private window. Sidebery panels could probably be configured to automatically include tabs created with this temporary containers.

As per history — no, with this approach all your history will still be saved, so this solution would not work.

[Felmon]

Firefox Containers are essentially a solution for separating cookies, you can read more about them here. However, if you want cookies in new container to not be saved, then you should better look at something like Temporary Containers, which creates fresh new containers on the go, acting essentialy like a private window. Sidebery panels could probably be configured to automatically include tabs created with this temporary containers.

As per history — no, with this approach all your history will still be saved, so this solution would not work.

Is it possible to add a setting to the tab panel in sidebery to automatically delete the history or not record the history? In fact, I mainly want to have a tab panel that can not be tracked or recorded, not whether the cookie is isolated. 😂

[Felmon]

Firefox Containers are essentially a solution for separating cookies, you can read more about them here. However, if you want cookies in new container to not be saved, then you should better look at something like Temporary Containers, which creates fresh new containers on the go, acting essentialy like a private window. Sidebery panels could probably be configured to automatically include tabs created with this temporary containers.

As per history — no, with this approach all your history will still be saved, so this solution would not work.

The Temporary Containers can indeed automatically delete history records, but there seems to be a problem with the mechanism. Moreover, there may be many temporary containers created by it. How can these temporary containers be matched to the only one panel in sidebery? For example, how to automatically match the prefix tmp_?

[emvaized]

For example, how to automatically match the prefix tmp_

Hm, I just checked and it seems Sidebery in fact can't do that – you can configure panel to automatically include tabs based on their urls, but not on their container name

[Felmon]

For example, how to automatically match the prefix tmp_

Hm, I just checked and it seems Sidebery in fact can't do that – you can configure panel to automatically include tabs based on their urls, but not on their container name

Most of the time, the private panel is to test the urls of other containers in safe mode. In other words, this tmp_panel may actually open all urls, so the url should not be limited. Is it possible for sidebery to implement the function of private mode by adding a certain setting in the tab panel?

For example, transplanting the automatic deletion history and cookie functions of temporary containers, but without generating multiple containers? Or sidebery can be compatible with temporary containers, and aggregate the containers generated by temporary containers into a tab panel?

[mbnuqw]

Right now, you can only bound the panel to exact container (auto-move rules with matching by container ID), but I think I can add support for matching container by its name (part of it), so it will be possible to bind /^tmp_/ container to the panel.

Is it possible for sidebery to implement the function of private mode by adding a certain setting in the tab panel? - Yes, "Private panel" is a planned feature (after the v5 release), but I'm not sure right now will it just Temporary Containers integration or a completely standalone feature.

[Felmon]

Right now, you can only bound the panel to exact container (auto-move rules with matching by container ID), but I think I can add support for matching container by its name (part of it), so it will be possible to bind /^tmp_/ container to the panel.

Is it possible for sidebery to implement the function of private mode by adding a certain setting in the tab panel? - Yes, "Private panel" is a planned feature (after the v5 release), but I'm not sure right now will it just Temporary Containers integration or a completely standalone feature.

Thank you for noticing and responding to my request. I don’t know how firefox works for the time being (because I just returned to firefox from edge) and I don’t know whether this private panel must rely on the container mechanism to achieve (cookie and other privacy-related) but it would be best if the privacy panel can exist without relying on the container.

So if there is a vote, I will vote for a completely standalone feature, and it is conceivable that once it is made, it is more likely to isolate other addons and achieve the purpose of a real private window.

Looking forward to your feature(matching container by its name) so that this waiting time will not be so boring.

[mbnuqw]

privacy panel can exist without relying on the container - Privacy panel will rely on containers, b/c otherwise It will be impossible to achieve separation of tab cookies of one panel from the cookies of tabs from other panels.

likely to isolate other addons - it won't be possible b/c Sidebery uses the Firefox Containers API, which is not allowing you to isolate addons.

The "Private panel" feature (as I imagine it now) will work as follows: There will be a keybinding and context menu option to create a new Private panel. With creation of that panel, A new, bound1 with that panel, container will be created. All new records in history from the tabs of this panel will be automatically removed. After removing that panel, the bound container (with all that cookies) also will be removed.

It will be possible to use this feature with another planned features: "Temporary panel"2 and "window-specific panels"3. Maybe, "Private panel" will automatically enable these features.

Also (just a note), you don't need the Multi-Account Containers(MAC) addon to use containers in Sidebery (if you don't need additional features from the MAC off course).

1 - New tabs will be open in that container. New tabs in other container that was opened in target container will be moved to this panel. 2 - see the #265 3 - panel will be visible only in the window where it was created and will be removed with closing of that window.

[Felmon]

privacy panel can exist without relying on the container - Privacy panel will rely on containers, b/c otherwise It will be impossible to achieve separation of tab cookies of one panel from the cookies of tabs from other panels.

likely to isolate other addons - it won't be possible b/c Sidebery uses the Firefox Containers API, which is not allowing you to isolate addons.

The "Private panel" feature (as I imagine it now) will work as follows: There will be a keybinding and context menu option to create a new Private panel. With creation of that panel, A new, bound1 with that panel, container will be created. All new records in history from the tabs of this panel will be automatically removed. After removing that panel, the bound container (with all that cookies) also will be removed.

It will be possible to use this feature with another planned features: "Temporary panel"2 and "window-specific panels"3. Maybe, "Private panel" will automatically enable these features.

Also (just a note), you don't need the Multi-Account Containers(MAC) addon to use containers in Sidebery (if you don't need additional features from the MAC off course).

1 - New tabs will be open in that container. New tabs in other container that was opened in target container will be moved to this panel. 2 - see the #265 3 - panel will be visible only in the window where it was created and will be removed with closing of that window.

OK, got it. Just follow your plan. Hope sidebery is getting better and better

[Lockszmith-GH]

Sorry for poking a sleeping issue with a stick, but what about Private Tabs?