• rhymepurple
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’m wondering the same thing. Aside from encouraging people to use the default settings to make each user’s browser/session harder to properly fingerprint, I’m really curious what privacy benefits this new browser provides compared to alternatives like Librewolf, hardened Firefox, etc.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      From what I’ve heard in the past, Mozilla is doing a good job upstreaming work from the Tor Browser devs and putting it behind an about:config value, if they don’t use it in Firefox. So, assuming your hardened Firefox uses the right config values and browser extensions, there should be relatively few differences…

      • Marius@mastodonapp.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        @Ephera @rhymepurple No. Privacy by option is worse than no privacy at all. Non technical people would install firefox because they read somewhere that it safe, but ultimately they would use it as it is thinking that is safe out of the box.

        • Ephera
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          @rhymepurple@lemmy.ml did specifically ask about hardened Firefox, which literally means Firefox with configuration changes to make it more secure.

          Having said that, personally I do think Firefox’s default experience is close to the best you can do for people that really just want to install without thinking about it.
          Going beyond that quickly results in broken webpages. And broken webpages require that you know what you’re doing, so you can unbreak them, if needed.

      • rhymepurple
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Thanks, this is really helpful! Didn’t notice it previously.