- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemdro.id/post/2787773 ([email protected])
cross-posted from: https://lemdro.id/post/2787773 ([email protected])
I’d rather not personally. I can just disable all that anyway.
LibreWolf also makes significant privacy and security improvements by applying certain settings from Arkenfox user.js and from the Tor Browser. Sure, I can debloat and harden Firefox myself, but all of that is already done on LibreWolf, so that’s what I recommend to new users, as they like to stick to the default settings.
Yeah its fair enough, but it’s easier to just use FF for me, I don’t care if they want some anonymous usage statistics and trying to be fully private online is a fools errand. Base FF is good enough imo.
It’s not just Mozilla telemetry that LibreWolf protects you against, it also prevents random websites from fingerprinting you and the preinstalled uBlock Origin blocks trackers and all of that shit
I’m also on Librewolf, but most people are not all that tech-savvy, so basic Firefox is better for them just because it has auto-update.
It’s also not that difficult to configure hardened Firefox. It takes a minute or two and there are plenty of written and video guides that’ll have even the least tech savvy people up and running quickly. The tech literacy required to reasonably protect your privacy isn’t very high anymore. The biggest hurdle is getting people to care about their privacy in the first place.
Librewolf is a wonderful project but not something I recommend very often in my personal life, if only because most people just don’t need or want that level of protection at the expense of convenience.
You can also use the Firefox profile maker which is basically lets you create a new Firefox profile with the features and hardening you want. The website: https://ffprofile.com/
Where does LibreWolf compromise on privacy or security?
I keep forgetting that Windows doesn’t have a proper package manager. From a software architecture point of view, an application shouldn’t be responsible for updates, this should be handled by the operating system or a specific component of it, the package manager (which Windows doesn’t have, at least not by default).