this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
164 points (93.2% liked)

Privacy

31219 readers
904 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
164
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by voxel@infosec.exchange to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
 

Warning to all Brave Browser Users

Blocking variations.brave.com which is used for A/B testing could potentially break Brave's functionalities. For me did Brave's "forgetful browsing" feature broke which seems to be disabled by default if you block this domain.

#brave #bravebrowser #privacy @privacy @privacyguides

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 54 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Firefox is safer and tbh, has probably the best UX and aesthetics out of anyone. Brave is garbage.

[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

For incognito browsing I recommend Librewolf, a firefox fork. If you want anything more secure, you should start looking into tor

[–] MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why is librewolf superior to our of the box Firefox? Or mullvad browser for that matter?

[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 11 months ago

It has included some privacy measures to resist fingerprinting like letterboxing and has more privacy focused search engines as default like searx. Also it takes out some firefox utilities like pocket which I don't really use

As for Mullwav browser I'm not really sure, it seems to be another reinforced firefox like librewolf

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)
[–] Linus_Torvalds@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Btw, here is a detailed, technical review. It is in German, but with transtae and all the code, it should be understandable.

TLDR: It's good.

[–] eya@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

i prefer to use librewolf as my everyday browser, while using mullvad as my browser for other things that dont require tor i like to keep things separated, personally

[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

I'm not really sure, I haven't used it. In fairness, I only use librewolf for incognito searches, not as a daily driver

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

As a Firefox user, the only thing Brave does that I wish Firefox would copy is their fingerprinting resistance. I know Firefox does have fingerprinting resistance but it's nowhere near the same level as Brave.

[–] the_lone_wolf@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago

Use privacy badger extension

[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No. Firefox with RFP, Arkenfox user.js, Librewolf or Tor-Browser unifies your fingerprint. Its universal among users. Brave scrambles it, while some may say that is actually not a real fingerprint and can be detected, making you stand out extremely

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Just to be clear, are you saying Firefox with fingerprinting resistance used in conjunction with Arkenfox user.js provides fingerprint unification, similar to what Tor browser does? I'll have to check that out.

I think both approaches are valid tbh. Having a unique fingerprint obviously uniquely identified you, but if it's randomised then your browsing sessions can't (in theory) be linked.

[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes. Arkenfox to my knowledge is 1:1 Tor configs. Librewolf is similar to arkenfox, no real differences afaik.

For regular browsing though, this means that everything is always deleted. So if you may change some configs, you mayyy be fingerprintable.

Good thing though, different from Tor-Browser is, that it deletes everything without using the private browsing mode. This means, that it has way more capabilities, and saving session for example has no fingerprinting effect really, as favicons and cache can be cleared.

The problem with randomized UserAgent is afaik, that in firefox it cant really fake a complete, real browser, fonts and all. So it would be very nice 90% of the time, but big tracking sites would know exactly who you are

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago

I'll look into this. Thank you for the information.

[–] Stahlreck@feddit.ch 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So if you may change some configs, you mayyy be fingerprintable.

You are fingerprintable either way unless you go all out. Going full on Arkenfox/Librewolf mode (with all settings enabled that decrease convenience) you can at most fool naive fingerprinting. For the more advanced one you need Tor.

And even for naive fingerprinting, unless you use Tor or a VPN (which you would have to trust) your IP alone + the fact that you use FF (which a few % of people worldwide do) along with some other basic info about your PC will make you very unique.

[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

A good VPN is a must of course.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The Chameleon extension could solve some of the fingerprinting issues as it can randomize the browser and OS info that is sent.

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago

If anyone who downvotes wants to jump in and explain why instead of doing drive-bys that would be appreciated. I don't see any reason why this browser extension wouldn't be an effective tool if it does what it says.

[–] zwekihoyy@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Brave is just a shill for Google mothership. Firefox is leading privacy and security through browsers.

[–] zwekihoyy@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Firefox has a weaker sandbox than chromium and less mature site isolation and therefore has lower security. privacy is a different story, but remember you're only as private as you are secure so Firefox is inherently not that private assuming a malicious site escapes the sandbox.

I'm fully against chrome's growing monopoly as well as Google surveillance capitalism but let's not be so dramatic with the "google mother ship" nonsense.

using chromium as a base does not equal data being sent back to Google, just like using Android as a base doesn't inherently send data back to Google.

i disagree ahola looks better but i still use iceraven on my phone and firefox on pc