Librewolf Browser


I’m trying to figure out why LibreWolf isn’t on the browser recommendations because this browser is very focused on Privacy.

I would assume that the reason might be related to the requirements that include auto-update (if somebody from the team could confirm this).

If this is the only reason, I think it’s worth reconsidering, since this page mentions that there’s an (optional) auto-updater in the installation, and given that most users are probably Windows users, and they’ve enabled the Microsoft Store, there’s also that option to auto-update. This is not a problem on macOS and Linux, given that package managers solved it.

Because it didn’t provide more than Arkenfox did for us at the time. Librewolf failed indeed under blocking updates of the browser but also add ons and there wasn’t really a reason to use it.

Mullvad basically did everything right here and is backed by a reputable company. They basically removed the need for manually hardening firefox much like what librewolf tries to do.

I don’t really see why librewolf should be recommended as i do not see an audience for it.

Mullvad is great if you want to get the best hardend browser and there is a guide if you want to use firefox in the best way. Where does that leave librewolf?


The reason seems to be past issues that were solved. Right now, it comes with Ublock Origin out of the box.

I have to disagree with you about the idea that there is no audience. I use LibreWolf as a secondary browser. There are other users who use it as well.

Also, I thought that PrivacyGuides was meant to recommend privacy-focused tools/browsers, not popular privacy tools/browsers.

Let me rephrase your question: Given the current state of LibreWolf, why should I use Mullvad instead? What are the advantages it has over LibreWolf that should make me question its use?

Mullvad Browser has numerous additional non-upstreamed privacy features that Librewolf doesn’t.

And Mullvad Browser is maintained/QA’ed by the Tor Browser team which gives it a much higher assurances of what it does.


So does mullvad: All together as one: This is how the Mullvad Browser works

The question is why you use this not if. I don’t see a valid reason for it as better options are available. I am asking so you can perhaps change my mind and explain what is offered by librewolf that isn’t done by others.

Actually i think you are mistaken. No PG does not recommend every other tool that does something around privacy. It only recommends the best available.

This entire discussion is also a duplicate of Librewolf Browser (Firefox Fork)

I’ve replied to another user, but I think the answer can also be applied to you: Librewolf Browser (Firefox Fork) - #91 by You_will_own_nothing

32-bit support. That’s it?

I saw that in just 5 minutes. I’m pretty sure if I spend some days with both I would find more differences. But I’m not going to do it. Feel free to do it yourself :wink:

No thanks. If you found 1 difference in 5 min then I’m not going to bother.

I think it is not so much that Librewolf is bad (it isn’t) so much as it doesn’t solve any problems that other Browsers on the list (Firefox, Mullvad) don’t already solve.

Librewolf is good for low-effort, or low-knowledge users who value privacy but won’t take the time to inform themselves or configure Firefox manually (more or less the same group that Brave appeals to, but the added selling point of being based on Firefox/Gecko and not-for-profit and none of the bloat and baggage of Brave).

I think the reasoning of the PG team is more or less that everything Librewolf does was and is already possible with Firefox (in fact almost every feature Librewolf enables is a feature that was designed and built by Firefox developers). So the lack of unique upsides, can’t justify the potential downsides of (1) having to trust an additional 3rd party (2) potential to fall behind on updates.

I understand this logic and somewhat agree with it. But I do see a place for Librewolf, Maybe not as a recommendation, but an honorable mention beside Arkenfox. I think for high-knowledge, competent users, Firefox+Arkenfox is slightly better choice than Librewolf, but for less knowledgeable or less motivated users, Arkenfox project and its documentation is not very accessible, so it won’t (and doesn’t intend to) have broad mainstream appeal. I think a short one sentence mention of Librewolf in this context would make sense.


  • Firefox = decent privacy respecting mainstream browser for a mainstream audience, 2 minutes of point and click configuration and you’ve got a fairly private browser.
  • Firefox + Arkenfox = Well suited for a primary browser for competent, knowledgeable, motivated users comfortable doing some research and getting their hands dirty.
  • Mullvad Browser = When privacy + blending in with the crowd is more important than usability/convenience features. Basically what an incognito mode should be but probably not a comfortable fit as the primary browser for most people
  • Librewolf would fit in a niche between Firefox and Firefox+Arkenfox. It has most of the advantages of FF+AF but isn’t so daunting or tedious for an inexperienced user to configure.

But Mullvad no mobile app

Librewolf has no mobile app either.