• meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

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

        • Programmer Belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year 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

        • Katlah@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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

        • Linus_Torvalds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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.

    • stifle867@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

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

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

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

        • zwekihoyy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.