The only niche I can see Librewolf filling is:
A user who doesn’t want to use chromium based browsers (or they’d use Brave), and doesn’t want to use arkenfoxjs (or they’d use Firefox), but also doesn’t want settings locked out for fingerprinting protection as they still want to fiddle (or they’d use Mullvad browser).
But this criteria also means that they are a power user who is very opinionated, and thus should not ideally:
Need PG to recommend them a browser
Or can pretty much configure what they wish to.
I do think PG should have limited, targeted recommendations, and suggest the objective best option (or multiple options for the ones considered equally good where multiple options exist). If the niche is already occupied by a better solution, there is no need to list “also exists” solutions.
I know this is not how Privacy Guides operate, but I would personally like to see the recommendations be a little more… approachable?!
Instead of the “our way or the highway” approach that I feel the recommendations currently is, I think that listing out other browser options - even inferior ones - and what you can do to make them more private, while also educating people on the actual differences between those browsers and their shortcomings, could help people start their privacy journey with what they already use. Or by choosing an easy second browser option, close to what they already use.
I have tried to get my nephews on board with some of this, but jumping through too many hoops at once just makes them feel overwhelmed. I have a feeling they are not the only ones who feel like that. Having another simple Firefox option with Librewolf does not seem like an “opinionated power user” option to me, but an easy way for someone to try something different out.
I am of course not saying to get rid of the “objectively best” recommendations that it currently provides, since that is useful, but I just wish the recommendations could be a little bit more than just a top tier list. No offense to the Privacy Guides team, of course. I would not be here otherwise.
Honestly, that’s why I recommend Brave to friends, family members, and other acquaintances who are not tech-savvy like myself; it’s a literal upgrade from Microsoft Edge’s bloatware and crap, which is just unparalleled.
LW competes with Firefox+Arkenfox which is meant for the user to tweak, not with MB (which you shouldn’t touch). I’d argue that it’s a bigger niche than you’d think. Many people have a problem with Mozilla and its direction with regards to user privacy and data collection. LW seems to be pretty committed at shipping good defaults that can be configured to match each users’ needs.
I have a browser installed in which I use arkenfox too, but remembering to update AF, merging changes etc. is a PITA, so I just pretty much never update (AF not the browser). Also, if Mozilla happens to implement a bad feature, said bad feature will be shipped to me and may be enabled straight away. Not ideal.
An ideal setup for me right now is: TB, MB with the proxy feature for ephemeral searches/browsing, and multiple instances of librewolf, with extra extensions for more convenient browsing, and one extra instance with split tunnelling for services that need to know my identity. In practice however I use a different browser (floorp+arkenfox, might switch to Zen sometime) for the latter, because keeping multiple instances of the same browser is a pain and is very likely to lead to a mistake (e.g. performing a search that I didn’t intend to, in the browser not connected to the VPN).
xD I think that of people who have a problem with Mozilla, pretty much 100% also have a problem with Brave. Plus, it’s chromium.
do you have a RSS for releases, or do you just randomly check the github to see if there’s an update every now and then?
It’s unfortunate but when it comes to long term, other than MB/TB things aren’t exactly looking up in my opinion. As far as I’m aware LW is still the better choice, but maybe Zen Browser will turn out good? I suppose we wait and see.
I run the updater after a new Firefox release or some of my modifications, which pulls the latest user.js from Github. Then, I get prompted to run the prefsCleaner.
Arkenfox isn’t for everyone, and especially isn’t for people who prefer a hands-off relationship towards tech. But calling it a “PITA” to update is a very big exaggeration in my opinion.
(I just timed how long it took me to update and it took 19 seconds in total. And it would be even quicker via the terminal.
Considering that on average Arkenfox has an update every 2 or 3 months, 19 seconds to update doesn’t seem especially burdensome (but if it is, checking for updates could just be automated).
Hey all, I’m on the LibreWolf team, and it’s true that since the departure of @fxbrit the project has taken a total nosedive when it comes to keeping up to date with Arkenfox and settings in general. We’re still making releases, but settings did not get updated.
There are also a bunch of useful tickets that also take my time, I’ve not been able to take the LW settings to the last AF release.
I see the point, but I am not part of the PG team at all, so I can’t my way or highway this
If approachability is the issue, I’d help them with Brave, since I’m assuming the people you are helping are not inheriting the anti chromium crusade done by some. It’s the most similar to chrome (which is what most people use) and works with everything (being based on chromium).
I disagree that “also exists” software should be listed, because it’s a slippery slope. PG becomes the warden and curator of a list that can be endlessly long. I don’t think the moderators or the community want this extra work which every week having “Why isn’t X listed when Y is also listed”. Limiting quantity is a necessary task.
Maybe, but LW is based on arkenfox, and Thorin has repeatedly claimed arkenfox will lead to Mullvad Browser, with the user js approach being retired. So I’m not sure if they are entirely separate competitors.
If it was a competition though, LW would lag behind Firefox and arkenfox combo, since they can’t ship update, their lead dev seems afk (as redoomed pointed out below), and tbf LW has been a bit of a messy project with some interesting choices.
Then developing something non-Mozilla is the way not LW. Being very practical, LW is nowhere near offering an alternative to Mozilla Firefox at all, and at best can fiddle with the toggles Mozilla gives them. LW can’t and won’t be able to develop an alternate browser, just a fork.
But the approaches are different. If Arkenfox dies then I guess there will be no good options left if you want to customize… LW seems to be in a worse state than I thought but maybe it will improve.
That’s true. I thought that I could trust LW to check for new stuff and disable any telemetry, data collection etc. before they ship the update but if they can’t even do that then there really isn’t a point.
Trusting Mozilla with security is one thing, and trusting them for best practices when it comes to user privacy/data collection is something else. I’d prefer to have at least a middle man that could “clean up” the browser a little before it’s shipped to me.
I think your thread is still active after such a long time is because web browser choice is definitely one of the most important security/privacy choices.
This topic will probably be discussed as long as this community is focused on user privacy!
If I may ask, what’s the significance of using a 3rd browser to stay logged into sites? I know there’s a convenience factor here, but I’m pretty sure arkenfox’s hardening script makes Firefox dump all cache and cookies after you close the browser. So when you relaunch it you won’t be signed in on any accounts. I’m unsure about Brave’s stock settings, but it probably does something similar.
