Firefox release notes: we improved the privacy of our browser
Chrome release notes: fuck you and fuck your fucking adblock
Let’s not get too excited, Firefox is integrating a privacy-invasive extension that they recently purchased, along with a trove of personal data.
AFAIK nobody asked them to do this, and the add-on was just fine as an add-on. That money could have gone to better things.
(If you’re more upset by my comment than Mozilla’s behavior, I’d love to know why!)
Clarity is needed here. The California language that sparked all this is qualified with “about FakeSpot’s products and services”. Meaning it could simply be third-party services that they send their own emails through.
After reading their privacy policy, nothing jumps out at me that contradicts this.
To be clear, I’m not a fan of the extension’s collection practices, but the down votes could be because this may be unwarranted fear.
Unwarranted fear or healthy skepticism? This is the perfect time to “just ask questions.” Firefox is selling itself as a privacy respecting platform and therefore should be held to a higher standard than the garbage that is chrome. If it can pass the test it will be proven again and earn more trust which should result in more users, if it fails then it deserves to be criticised and lose users. Point is if you are selling yourself as privacy respecting you are selling yourself by default as ethical.
True. According to Mozilla’s own words:
Principle 4
Individuals’ security and privacy on the internet are fundamental and must not be treated as optional.
100% agree. I wasn’t trying to say the collection practice isn’t bad, just that the other linked threads may be taking things a bit farther than what the policy actually says.
Ok. It’s things like this where the detail matters so thank you
I love the wholesome and fact-focused discussions here on Lemmy. Good show, Mr. SuckMyWang. 🤝
Why would anybody assume Fakespot wouldn’t sell user data when they have already proven they would: to Mozilla?
Mozilla has had ample time to fix the privacy issues in the Fakespot policy, but they haven’t. Instead, they’ve already started injecting FakeSpot into beta editions of Firefox.
Because they are now owned by Mozilla. As stated above, I, like others, don’t like the practice, and I hope Mozilla adjusts acordingly.
Right before Mozilla purchased it, Fakespot’s terms were updated to explicitly allow the transfer of user data to Mozilla.
You understand why they changed those terms, right? Because Mozilla isn’t reselling the data and the data can’t go elsewhere.
Mozilla isn’t reselling the data
[citation needed]
Sure, but this doesn’t mean much. If they didn’t transfer ownership, FakeSpot could do whatever they wanted with that data. By forcing the transfer, Mozilla can choose to keep it private.
And yet, the privacy policy was never amended to prevent sales of data, either before the acquisition or after it.
Take off the rose tinted glasses, because when you wear them, red flags just look like flags.
Use LibreWolf, it’s Firefox without all the garbage like telemetry, Pocket or Sponsored Sites. It makes substantial privacy and security improvements and comes with uBlock Origin pre-installed.
No idea why people use Brave when Firefox exists
Well, it said right there in the article that until today, Brave was that only browser that would truncate tracker tags when copying a URL to clipboard.
Moar browsers == moar innovation.
Interesting, in the past Brave injected their own affiliate links into URLs. That alone should tell you not to use it.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-links-crypto-privacy-ceo-apology
Oh plus the integration with crypto…
It has the potential to be a completely frictionless entry ramp to crypto. It has (had?) such potential, but they just keep not delivering anything of actual use. So, yeah, Firefox.
Who wants that crap, though? I thought Brave was supposed to be a browser, not an attempt to convert the unconverted by using a browser as a bait and switch.
Yeah but you can easily install clearURLs
Why are you spelling more wrong?
Default Brave blocks ads more aggressively than default Firefox. Of course you can achieve that with Firefox + uBlock Origin, but add-ons are not available on iOS and iPad OS.
That’s just my experience. I still use Firefox + Firefox Focus BTW. To block more aggressively, I also use VPN + Adguard Home.
This. Only reason I use Brave is for my iPhone (which I am already planning to jump back to Android when it’s time for a new phone) because I can listen to YouTube videos/music in the background and no ads when going through the browser (another reason I’m going back to Android is for Revanced). Everything else is FF
Yep and for some people it’s too hard to think about extensions so just having them install Brave is a perfect recommendation (for now anyway).
Brave has superior fingerprint protection, they achieve this by randomizing the browsers fingerprint. Visit EFF’s cover your tracks to test your browser.
To achieve the same functionality that brave achieves out of the box with Firefox I need many extensions and then when I profile both browsers, Firefox is more resource intensive. Brave’s blocking is native to the browser. I will give Firefox the W because I’ve read that uBlock is technically more capable. But as a long time Firefox/uBlock user who switched to brave - this has not been noticable.
As for accessibility, I can configure brave to be really aggressive at ad blocking, tracking blocking, fingerprint blocking, and restricting JS even, and all those options I can set from one place instead of in different settings/extensions. When a website breaks, I click on the button next to the URL and immediately have options to granularly dial down the “protection” or add a website to my trusted list. In Firefox I was annoyed to having go through settings for the extension.
Brave plans to continue supporting Manifest V2 after Google kills it. For Ungoogled Chromium, however, it’s still undecided, likely depending on whether UG contributors are willing to maintain it.
The only reason why I still have Brave installed is because some sites don’t work with Firefox. Like Webflow’s editor. At least they claim it’s not supported yet.
I use chromium for that, there are many better browsers (even chromium forks) than braves IMO.
I use Falkon.
Did you try faking the user agent?
No, technically, I don’t even have to. The website just gives a message that it wasn’t tested on Firefox. But it’s still usable. I just don’t want to deal with any problems that might arise in the complicated process of building a website in the browser.
For me, the YouTube experience is better.
How so?
So I just checked and they fixed it but for a while Firefox was not blocking the ad block warning popup that google put and brave didn’t have that.
Brave has superior fingerprint protection, they achieve this by randomizing the browsers fingerprint. Visit EFF’s cover your tracks to test your browser.
To achieve the same functionality that brave achieves out of the box with Firefox I need many extensions and then when I profile both browsers, Firefox is more resource intensive. Brave’s blocking is native to the browser. I will give Firefox the W because I’ve read that uBlock is technically more capable. But as a long time Firefox/uBlock user who switched to brave - this has not been noticable.
As for accessibility, I can configure brave to be really aggressive at ad blocking, tracking blocking, fingerprint blocking, and restricting JS even, and all those options I can set from one place instead of in different settings/extensions. When a website breaks, I click on the button next to the URL and immediately have options to granularly dial down the “protection” or add a website to my trusted list. In Firefox I was annoyed to having go through settings for the extension.
Brave plans to continue supporting Manifest V2 after Google kills it. For Ungoogled Chromium, however, it’s still undecided, likely depending on whether UG contributors are willing to maintain it.
Because Firefox Android sucks, no trolling. It’s slow and in some pages, specially with video DRM don’t even work. Two, there are features lacking on Firefox for few use cases like clipboard with VNC “Your browser is not configured to allow access to your computer’s clipboard”. Besides, people here are so politically biased that they are capable of justify some crap that comes with Firefox such as pocket full of ads, ads by default on Android in the main page, and other less “shady” things, like Mozilla CEOs salary. I will be open to considerate again by default if Firefox Android receives a great performance upgrade. Something that I liked about brave here is that they said it will support MV2 extensions when MV3 comes.
Maybe try the testing branch (called ‘Firefox for testers’, or better yet, fennec)?
I’m using Firefox Nightly on Android, there is not other bleeding edge branch. On desktop the story is completely different. Listen, I’m not here because of the politics. Eich is shit because his postures about gay marriage, we all know that. I am here exclusively to talk about performance and what is the better tech stack of browsers.
Cool man, I agree on Eich, not that I was aware of it at all before. It’s tragic how politics complicates everything for all the wrong reasons.
I don’t know what the best tech stack is (esp. on mobile), and I’ve always hated how mobile-based Firefox struggles to go full screen with videos half of the time.
I think fennec is just a fork that removes some Mozilla tracking, possibly only available via FDroid(?). It’s no different really…
oooh the Copy Link without Site Tracking feature looks like it would be pretty useful
Wish you could just set that as default.
how do you set it
You can’t. Which is why I wish you could.
Seems like when you right click a link, theres an option under “Copy Link” that says “Copy Link without Site Tracking”
Oh damn that’s sweet
You may want to check out ClearURLs https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/clearurls/
Firefox’s been killing it recently
Hopefully between Firefox’s recent streak of good releases and Google majorly jumping the shark lately we’ll see Chrome marketshare take a dive.
Firefox market share has just passed 3%. It’s lagging behind Microsoft Edge and Opera, but it’s still beating Samsung Internet.
Cloudflare says 4.7%. I trust them more with these statistics because
- they serve a significant chunk of the internet
- they collect data serverside and I’m pretty sure more people block tracking scripts than change their user agent
But yes, it’s way too small
Eh, I’m ok with it being small. You get targeted by fewer exploits if you’re using a browser that isn’t high in market share. There’s also less incentive to try to monetize their market share than when it’s very popular.
Just crazy to me that Firefox is that low I really hope they can rebound. Chrome’s strangehold on browser engines is bad for everyone.
Yeah!
Now hopefully they can enable HDR video playback within the next few years (bug open for 5 years at this point)
- Settings> Privacy> Website Privacy Preferences> Tell websites not to sell or share my data
Legally binding in California, Colorado, maybe EU and more. - Right click links now provides “Copy Link Without Site Tracking”
- Fingerprinting Protection in the Canvas API when you’re in a private window, or you set Enhanced Tracking Protection to Strict.
#1 might be a crapshoot in some cases because it, like the “do not track me” flag, can increase the fingerprinting information for a website outside of California or Colorado.
There are two more privacy settings that are being changed exclusively for German users, but people worldwide can turn those on now:
- URL [parameter] Tracking Protection in private windows
- Cookie banner blocking in private windows
Both of these sound like good ideas in theory, but After thinking about it for a bit, it also makes different users in different situations easier to profile. Assuming people keep the defaults, isn’t this a way that it would be easier to identify a German user in incognito mode?
Thanks for the comprehensive write-up. It convinced me to migrate back to Firefox.
I was on Firefox (8 years ago), moved to Chrome (I liked the non-admin/transparent update feature and Websites didn’t break like they did with ff), then moved to brave (basically chrome + more privacy), and now I’ll go back the Firefox (I hope I won’t encounter too many non-FF websites)
If you’re interested in Firefox with privacy out of the box, LibreWolf is pretty good too. It enhances Firefox kind of like how Brave enhances Chrome, but it doesn’t add any surprise features like wallpaper ads, cryptocurrency stuff, etc.
The only issue is some websites don’t like to load in Librewolf. Windy.tv for example. I’ve never had any serious browser issues in Firefox lately.
I expect to have some website compatibility issues with Firefox/librewolf, as it does have a 3% share of the global browser market - so, website development energy is focused on the chrome/safari experience. However, 8+ years ago I felt I needed to use chrome at least every other day to view certain websites - it was frustrating.
I’m hoping (and willing to try it out) to see if this has improved.
Neato, I’ll check it out. I’m also trying out mull for android (as I’d like to keep my desktop/cellphone bookmarks/browser-history in sync)
If you want to non ff sites to work on ff you can just spoof tour user agent. 90% of non ff sites actually work. Some use web usb and bluetooth stuff that doesnt work on ff.
can increase the fingerprinting information for a website outside of California or Colorado.
Or you know, the entire EU/EEC which has more inhabitants than USA.
I always use do not track. If they fingerprint me with that, they are explicitly disregarding it. It obviously gives moral superiority.
- Settings> Privacy> Website Privacy Preferences> Tell websites not to sell or share my data
Thank you old friend. Sorry I’ve been gone for so long.
Day is over. Didn’t ship that day after all I guess
Is still on the ship. Will arrive shortly at your destination.
Firefox needs to chill on the version numbers
Blame Chrome for ruining versioning
Honestly I think this is more on Apple for using “os x” for two decades
Blame users for not understanding semantic versioning and just wanting a bigger number.
Remember that time the users were right?
They’re not the ones that moved to whole number versioning
They haven’t though. They changed the naming to “macOS” years ago to retire the old numbering system.
Ok yeah it’s much easier to get my dad to tell me he’s on “v2.12.6.001-build7F2023n12-kb0A hotfix”
who gives a shit my dude? “Oh my god, 120? How ludicrous! There’s not even a decimal point or a hyphen! I run arch btw”
Ok yeah it’s much easier to get my dad to tell me he’s on “v2.12.6.001-build7F2023n12-kb0A hotfix”
That’s a false dichotomy. Firefox version numbering was never like that. It used the scheme
major_version.minor_version.patch_releaselike almost every piece of software except browsers still uses.The advantage of this system is that the numbers are meaningful: they tell you how significant a release is, whereas with straight versioning the version number gives you no clue about what the “119 to 120 upgrade” contains. It might be simple bugfixes, it might add some new functionality or it might be a complete overhaul that breaks everything.
The reason why browsers switched to a straight versioning scheme was never to make it easier for users to identify which release they’re on. The reason was artificial version inflation (i.e. “my version is bigger than yours”), and to force users into an incessant upgrade treadmill. In the past users could for example hold back on a major release upgrade until all the kinks were worked out while still receiving maintenance for their older major release.
no, I’m looking forward to firefox 420 in 2048
Nvidia needs to chill on the version numbers, their graphics driver is currently at version 537 lol
I remember using Nvidia drivers in the 70s years ago. I also remember thinking it was crazy when they rolled over 100. 😂
it was crazy when they rolled over 100
It was the same with Firefox and Chromium when they hit version 100. Some developers were scared that websites would start crashing because of the three digit version string in the user-agent.
I think it’s alright, sure it’s not conventional but you get the point after all and non techy people also get the point. bigger number = highest update
We need the TL;DR bot
waiting mozilla release its gecko webview and site isolation on mobile browser
I know this won’t affect LibreWolf immediately but can anyone speculate as to how or when the Firefox updates would affect LibreWolf, if at all?
I switched from FF to LW recently so I’m just curious what the relationship(s) might be.
ETA: Another question: How do I update LW without the LW updater? Uninstall and reinstall? Thanks!
deleted by creator
Cool, thanks.
Interesting that it happens so quickly. I was not expecting that.
Isn’t it just changing some flags, toggling some options, debranding and disable basic telemetry? I honestly don’t know, last time I checked was a long time ago.
It also provides a user interface where you can toggle those flags without searching through about:config.
Functionally, it’s about the same as Firefox + arkenfox JavaScript, but it’s a heck of a lot easier for a newbie to download and install.
I use LibreWolf on Debian and just got the update. It doesn’t take that much time.
Mozilla Foundation fronts Mozilla Corporation which is for-profit and brings in nearly a Billion in revenue.
Don’t donate, do harden it.
To be fair, a lot of that money comes from google that pays to have google as search engine
Can you share some proof/links about this? I am aware of Google paying for companies like Apple, but Mozilla?
Thanks! That’s some interesting and shitty business model by Google. 🙆
They do this for all platforms and browsers they dont own. Apple/safari? You bet. Opera? Yuuuup. Android? Lol, they own android
Or just use LibreWolf
Firefox is good privacy wise, but does not have sensible default. Also there have been times when mozilla have made not so promising statements.
For true privacy enthusiasts see See
Agree, I recently checked further after seeing “sponsored” icons in my new tab page. Had to turn that off. I understand why it’s on by default, it’s just not congruent with privacy.
I’d say thats less a matter of privacy since it doesn’t reveal anything to the “sponsors”. More like bloat? Honestly can’t find the exact for rn
I think you’re right. It exposes whatever IP endpoint you’re on to the request but irrelevant with a VPN.
But…does it sync?
Yes
Ehat defaults arent sensible? Oh no the bar is on the bottom(its more logical on large phones and its the first and only setting you need to change to make it work like chrome). On pc its just better than chrome in any way.
Or, you know, arkenfox and its wiki: https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/
