# Is fennec f- droid trustworthy , why privacyguides doesn’t recommend it? **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-fennec-f-droid-trustworthy-why-privacyguides-doesn-t-recommend-it/27487 **Category:** Questions **Created:** 2025-05-11T01:34:55Z **Posts:** 20 ## Post 1 by @niuo345533 — 2025-05-11T01:34:55Z Privacyguides and techlore resources doesn’t recommend fennec fdroid , is fennec not that trustworthy , can it replace mull ? --- ## Post 2 by @overdrawn98901 — 2025-05-11T02:05:28Z What does it have that other recommendations don’t have? PGs preference is to recommend the top software in a category that are distinct from one another. If there is not distinct advantage, it’s not a strong enough competitor to add to the list. More recommendations is more risk, as recommendations can be revoked (which is a large negative for those who adopted it). --- ## Post 3 by @niuo345533 — 2025-05-11T02:46:12Z So no major issue , just about keeping the recommendations strong . --- ## Post 4 by @overdrawn98901 — 2025-05-11T03:26:30Z Non sequitor conclusion. I didn’t say it is trustworthy; I have no knowledge, and will let more educated members chime in. But to not be recommended does not imply it’s good or bad. --- ## Post 5 by @anon63378630 — 2025-05-11T03:33:05Z I spent like 3 years co-maintaining it, it is fine, just largely vanilla Firefox compiled from source. relan, the maintainer, is also highly skilled and a long term foss contributor (eg. exfat-fuse). --- ## Post 6 by @TheDoc — 2025-05-11T13:29:42Z Privacy Guides previously [recommended against](https://web.archive.org/web/20230610080641/https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-browsers/) all Gecko-based browsers for Android as a result of this [proposal](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/revise-statements-on-gecko-browsers-android-to-make-security-shortcomings-clear/17840). It looks like the [current](https://archive.is/hhwGa) page doesn’t include the same anti-recommendation. Based on this recent [thread](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/firefox-finally-rolling-out-fission-on-android/26456) it looks like sandboxing hasn’t improved much so I’m not sure why the Privacy Guides team removed the warning. --- ## Post 7 by @anon80779245 — 2025-05-11T16:38:00Z > [@TheDoc](#): > > Privacy Guides previously [recommended against](https://web.archive.org/web/20230610080641/https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-browsers/) all Gecko-based browsers for Android as a result of this [proposal](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/revise-statements-on-gecko-browsers-android-to-make-security-shortcomings-clear/17840). It looks like the [current](https://archive.is/hhwGa) page doesn’t include the same anti-recommendation. Based on this recent [thread](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/firefox-finally-rolling-out-fission-on-android/26456) it looks like sandboxing hasn’t improved much so I’m not sure why the Privacy Guides team removed the warning. Privacy Guides doesn’t have anti-recommendation (generally speaking) and Mull was recommended until it went unmaintained. > [@niuo345533](#): > > Privacyguides and techlore resources doesn’t recommend fennec fdroid , is fennec not that trustworthy , can it replace mull ? IronFox is a Mull fork, with better security and privacy than Fennec. --- ## Post 8 by @sha123 — 2025-05-11T19:29:16Z > [@TheDoc](#): > > it looks like sandboxing hasn’t improved much so I’m not sure why the Privacy Guides team removed the warning Sometimes the best technical arguments aren’t enough to convince them and they do their thing anyway. --- ## Post 9 by @niuo345533 — 2025-05-12T02:11:39Z I’m gonna go with ironfox , thanks guys. --- ## Post 10 by @sha123 — 2025-05-12T09:10:19Z Chromium-based browsers would have been a much better choice. --- ## Post 11 by @TinFoilHat — 2025-05-12T09:45:57Z It depends, I personally prefer Ironfox as daily driver, except for PWA. I pick Brave for PWA though. --- ## Post 12 by @sha123 — 2025-05-12T11:22:01Z > [@TinFoilHat](#): > > It depends, I personally prefer Ironfox as daily driver, except for PWA. Depends on what? Chromium-based browsers are many years ahead in terms of security on Android and I don’t see anything in Ironfox which outweighs this compared to Brave or Cromite. --- ## Post 13 by @anon63378630 — 2025-05-12T11:28:51Z > [@sha123](#): > > which outweighs this - uBlock Origin - offline translations - fully foss - not supporting a monopoly - safe browsing that works without play services or use of privacy invading enhanced mode --- ## Post 14 by @sha123 — 2025-05-12T11:47:38Z While these are all good things to have, I would rather prefer a browser with security which is adequate for 2025 and not being a decade behind in some important aspects. > [@anon63378630](#): > > not supporting a monopoly I mean do users of Ironfox really support FF to combat this monopoly simply through their usage? Developing and maintaining browsers requires a lot of money and FF needs money to make their browser better. Ironfox users don’t bring any money to FF through their usage (e.g. no search engine deal or all the other things in FF, which FF uses to get money) and no money to websites which monetize themselves through ads, which could lead them to optimize their websites not only for Chromium, but also for FF. So they provide almost no incentives for FF to succeed. IMO it would be more effective if they simply donated money to FF. --- ## Post 16 by @TheDoc — 2025-05-12T12:52:56Z Increasing Firefox’s market share might help? I’ll occasionally find a website that’s broken on Firefox presumably because the market share was so small that the web developers don’t care to support it. This can worsen usability on Firefox (and forks like the Tor Browser, Mullvad Browser, etc.) which harms the viability of the browser overall. ~~But I agree, donating to the Mozilla Foundation probably has a larger impact than being a single user increasing their market share.~~ ([Not possible](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-fennec-f-droid-trustworthy-why-privacyguides-doesn-t-recommend-it/27487/18), you’d have to purchase [Mozilla products](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/products/) such as: [Mozilla VPN](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/products/vpn/), [Firefox Relay](https://relay.firefox.com/), [Thunderbird Pro Services](https://blog.thunderbird.net/2025/04/thundermail-and-thunderbird-pro-services/), and [Pocket Premium](https://getpocket.com/premium).) --- ## Post 17 by @anon80779245 — 2025-05-12T13:32:06Z > [@sha123](#): > > I mean You forget users using Firefox, finding bugs and reporting them. Not to mention Ironfox often enables security/privacy enhancing techniques that Mozilla often rolls out slowly due to compat/performance issue (Fennec rolled-out local translations before Firefox, IronfFox enabled Fission while still only on Nightly). I don’t specifically about Ironfox, but at least Fennec (on which IF is based) does contribute upstream. Also, Ironfox doesn’t ask for donations, so they aren’t taking away any money from Firefox. --- ## Post 18 by @jonah — 2025-05-12T13:37:36Z > [@sha123](#): > > simply donated money to FF. Too bad this is impossible to do, since the Mozilla Corporation → Mozilla Foundation money pipeline is a one-way street. Better off buying a Mozilla Corp product like VPN or Monitor, or donating to a different browser engine group like Ladybird or Servo if you want to actually support browser development. --- ## Post 19 by @anon80779245 — 2025-05-12T13:43:26Z Exactly, and for now Mozilla runs fine with Google money, although this is probably gonna be chopped in August. --- ## Post 20 by @spacejourn — 2025-05-12T13:53:14Z Mojjila is devloping thunderbird pro and thundermail , have to wait and see , how this is going yo work out.