# If Chromium is the most secure browser engine, how come the most secure browsers don't use it? **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/if-chromium-is-the-most-secure-browser-engine-how-come-the-most-secure-browsers-dont-use-it/39950 **Category:** General **Created:** 2026-08-16T08:16:53Z **Posts:** 15 ## Post 1 by @not-wittingly — 2026-08-16T08:16:53Z Thinking mostly of Tor browser and Mullvad Browser. --- ## Post 2 by @null — 2026-08-16T08:21:06Z They are not. --- ## Post 3 by @eteszi — 2026-08-16T08:21:13Z Privacy, anonymity, and security are three different things. --- ## Post 4 by @not-wittingly — 2026-08-16T08:38:10Z So what is the “most secure” browser? --- ## Post 5 by @botany904 — 2026-08-16T08:51:05Z Vanadium --- ## Post 6 by @null — 2026-08-16T09:42:20Z depends on what you mean by secure and the OS you are using. Based on our security bros on PG. :melting_face::+1: GrapheneOS → Vanadium Other Androids → Probably Brave IOS → Safari Fedora and Secureblue → Trivalent Other Linux distros - \> Probably Brave Origin Whonix and Tails → Tor Browser QubesOS → Depends Windows idk MacOS → I guess Safari but idk I guess? But for me personally, security isn’t the most important thing for a browser as long as the browser has good enough security and keeps up with updates, you will be fine. > **[Selecting a Browser - Chromium Hardening Guide](https://rknf404.github.io/chromium-hardening-guide/BROWSER_SELECTION/)** --- ## Post 7 by @autfernandez1987 — 2026-08-16T09:57:08Z Because of all the bad press Chrome has received lately, I would have presumed Firefox derivatives like floorp, librewolf etc. to be safer choices for linux distros than Chrome based ones like Brave (even if it’s the Origin variant). Is that presumption invalid? It’s nice to see some browsers mentioned here that I hadn’t even heard of. I’ll see what they’re all about. --- ## Post 8 by @null — 2026-08-16T10:06:41Z As a casual LibreWolf enjoyer, I approve. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: LibreWolf has been my go to set and forget browser for Linux for the last few years. --- ## Post 9 by @Ganther — 2026-08-16T10:08:51Z Because when Tor Browser was first created Chromium wasn’t even a thing. I’d imagine if they released it today, it would be a Chromium-based browser. Mullvad Browser is basically just Tor Browser without the Tor so it’s “easy” releasing it automatically using GitHub Actions. --- ## Post 10 by @JojoYou — 2026-08-16T10:27:52Z > [@null](#): > > Windows idk Going for security Edge might be the best. As it has the same benefit as Safari on iOS, Vanadium on GrapheneOS and Trivalent on SecureBlue: OS integration It works with Microsoft Defender and has other security features [Microsoft Edge and Microsoft Defender Application Guard | Microsoft Learn](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/deployedge/microsoft-edge-security-windows-defender-application-guard) > **[Browse more safely with Microsoft Edge](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/deployedge/microsoft-edge-security-browse-safer)** > > Learn how enhanced security supports safer browsing with Microsoft Edge. But if I used Windows I’d go for Brave Otherwise I agree Question, wouldn’t be Brave better on iOS too as both use the same rendering engine there thus the same OS security integration? --- ## Post 11 by @Expert4870 — 2026-08-16T11:18:10Z > [@null](#): > > Whonix and Tails → Tor Browser > QubesOS → Depends > Windows idk > MacOS → I guess Safari but idk Why wouldn’t these be Chrome for MacOS, Whonix, and Tails, Trivalent on Qubes and Edge on Windows? Idk if trivalent works on Whonix and Tails but I remember hearing it works on fedora which you can use on Qubes afaik. --- ## Post 12 by @Riley.Foster24 — 2026-08-16T11:41:47Z I’m also trying to separate engine security from the browser’s hardening and default privacy settings here. The distinction between Chromium’s upstream security model and the more opinionated configurations used by Tor and Mullvad makes the comparison less straightforward, so I’m following the concrete examples in this thread. --- ## Post 13 by @john.982387487 — 2026-08-16T14:39:53Z If you use browser in disposable qube in QubesOS then any browser is secure… --- ## Post 14 by @null — 2026-08-16T15:17:27Z > [@Expert4870](#): > > Why wouldn’t these be Brave for MacOS, Whonix, and Tails, Becasue Whonix and Tails is purpose built distros and is designed to add features and security to Tor. Brave would just add fingerprint and attack surface, and you will stand out from the crowd. you will defeating the whole purpose of using Tor/Whonix and Tails. If you want to use “Whonix” with Brave for whatever reason use Kicksecure they even have a [installer for it.](https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Browser-choice) For MacOS, you may be right, I have no idea. I have never really looked into MacOS, I’m just guessing they would have some OS hardening that only works on Safari, like Edge does on Windows. Idk. > [@Expert4870](#): > > Idk if trivalent works on Whonix and Tails Even if you installed Trivalent, you would be better off using Brave because they are based on Debian and use AppArmor. What makes Trivalent better than Brave on Fedora “for security” is mainly the SELinux policy they added to Trivalent. And would probably only work on Fedora based distros with SELinux. > [@Expert4870](#): > > Trivalent on Qubes I guess for Fedora templates, but it would depend on the template and what you’re trying to achieve, and Trivalent wouldn’t matter that much for Qubes security, to be honest. --- ## Post 15 by @Expert4870 — 2026-08-16T15:33:17Z To the rest of your system but you get defense in depth from a secure browser.