this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
43 points (90.6% liked)

Privacy

32492 readers
768 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

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been using Brave for the past three or so years but I do know that Linux/privacy enthusiasts tend to swear by Firefox. Wanted to get people's thoughts on this topic to see if I should be making a potential switch. Thanks!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I haven't done an audit of either but here are some points to consider:

  1. Brave is built on top of chromium, so it "by default" exposes lots of new APIs that Google is introducing that make fingerprinting easier if not outright invade your privacy. For example see https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ and look at the "negative" items. Many of them such as Web NFC, Web Bluetooth and WebUSB API are against because they don't have adequate protections against fingerprinting or other privacy or security concerns. Brave seems to do a pretty good job removing or disarming these APIs but they are basically trying to keep their balance on a shaky and antagonistic foundation.
  2. On a similar note Google pushing these APIs work because of the greater market share. Again, derivatives can provide some resistance by disabling these APIs but unless all of them block the same APIs they will still be available widespread. So using a Chromium-based browser harms the entire web over time by allowing Google to have control. Right now Firefox (and derivatives) and Safari are the only browsers that you can use to truly oppose Google's control over the web platform.
[–] astramist@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Agreed! Many times I faced the fact that the Chrome developers don't follow the W3C standards, but they require it from Mozilla. Therefore, some functionality will only work in Chrome, but not in Mozilla (it's not their bad!).

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 25 points 2 years ago (15 children)

Brave has tried one scam after another before. I wouldn't trust it for a second for any use.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] binEpilo@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Is it more private than brave? Normal Firefox: no Librewolf (Firefox Fork): yes Hardened Firefox: yes

[–] FarLine99@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Good answer. Hardened Firefox or LibreWolf with some extensions are awesome options for privacy!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sizeoftheuniverse@programming.dev 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As hard as it is for me to admit, and based on some tests, Brave had better fingerprinting resistance than Firefox. I don't trust the guys behind Brave, but their product is good.

[–] ruination@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Iirc isn't it more like Brave is better out of the box, but given sufficient configuration, both are more or less equal?

[–] FarLine99@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Out of the box - yes, maybe. But I think that with some extensions (uBlock Origin, CanvasBlocker, Chameleon) and tweaking hardened Firefox (LibreWolf, Mull) would be way better!

[–] furrowsofar@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

Not the point. Using a chromium browser is a vote for Google domination of the web. Just no.

[–] heimlichmanure@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Brave isn't more private than Firefox but depending on the platform that Firefox is on, Firefox might be less secure than Brave.

[–] ruination@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Still waiting for Firefox Android to be secure enough for me to ditch Brave.

[–] brihuang95@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

OOL, what's up with firefox android's app?

[–] ruination@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

IIRC something along the lines of it not having proper site isolation, making it less secure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] smeg@feddit.uk 9 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Short version: Firefox on desktop, something chromium-based on Android. See https://www.privacyguides.org/en/tools/ for the long version!

[–] FarLine99@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

For security - yes, chromium-based. But for privacy Mull (Fennec) with extension support would be superior!

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No sync that way though, so I'm not sure how someone would access bookmarks, history, and open tabs that way.

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Up to you if you think that feature is worth the security/privacy loss. Personally I've not missed syncing tabs across devices, I do most things on the one device anyway.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think there would be any privacy loss, Firefox sync is encrypted and all that. I work on multiple devices so I absolutely need it.

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

I meant the security/privacy loss of using Chromium on desktop or Firefox on Android

[–] doofiss@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe the explanation is somewhere on the site you linked, but I didn't see it. Why is Firefox on Android less secure?

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

Under the Android section:

On Android, Firefox is still less secure than Chromium-based alternatives: Mozilla's engine, GeckoView, has yet to support site isolation or enable isolatedProcess.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›