# What do you think of mozilla vpn? **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/what-do-you-think-of-mozilla-vpn/27804 **Category:** Questions **Created:** 2025-05-24T05:32:22Z **Posts:** 25 ## Post 1 by @Usef — 2025-05-24T05:32:22Z I recently discovered that mozilla have their own VPN service and it’s also available on IOS as well. Should I go for it? What are your thoughts on it? --- ## Post 2 by @Bhaelros — 2025-05-24T07:02:52Z It is Mullvad VPN --- ## Post 3 by @Usef — 2025-05-24T07:49:48Z Ok so mozilla vpn is fine as I was considering mullvad vpn and IVPN as an alternative. --- ## Post 4 by @Bhaelros — 2025-05-24T08:18:19Z Buying it directly from Mullvad will be much more cheaper. IVPN is also good. --- ## Post 5 by @crystalshower — 2025-05-24T10:12:55Z It’s Mullvad under the hood. > **[Mozilla VPN Servers Around the World](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/products/vpn/resource-center/vpn-servers-around-the-world/)** > > Because VPNs help you establish privacy on the web when using public networks, Mozilla wants to ensure that you are protected from online threats no matter where your journey takes you. --- ## Post 6 by @TinFoilHat — 2025-05-24T10:26:47Z Mozilla woud actually be cheaper if you go for annual sub at $5, that cheaper than €5 in mullvad. Mozilla also offers VPN + Relay bundle, can have a look if interested. I was using Firefox relay before switching to Proton suite family plan --- ## Post 7 by @Bhaelros — 2025-05-24T10:55:51Z For EU it is 5 Euro in Mozilla’s page and you need to buy yearly package, otherwise it is 10 Euro. On Mullvad’s page it is 5 Euro per month, no discounts on yearly packages. --- ## Post 8 by @Usef — 2025-05-24T12:04:44Z I was thinking of supporting mozilla by buying their vpn but thanks for informing me, now I’ll either buy mullvad or IVPN directly. --- ## Post 9 by @TheDoc — 2025-05-24T14:24:55Z If you pay for a 1 year plan it may be even cheaper than Mullvad, but according to @Bhaelros it may cost the same if you’re in the EU. Even if it costs the same, you’d still be supporting Mozilla so it’s still worth it in my opinion. --- ## Post 10 by @curie — 2025-05-24T23:40:10Z I have many questions about this. 1. Is there any security problems with it? 2. Does Mozilla have any access to the traffic? 3. Does it have good Linux compatibility? 4. Does it have feature parity with Mullvad? --- ## Post 11 by @anon57862721 — 2025-05-25T13:35:20Z Because it is Mullvad under the hood as others have explained, it’s still better to directly go with Mullvad if you’re actually considering it. Mozilla doesn’t seem to share or market this as much as they should - issues with Mozilla management is plenty but that’s different discussion. Technically, any VPN can ensure they have access anti all traffic so that’s why it’s important to choose a VPN that has a no logs policy and that’s open source and audited/vetted by third parties to ensure of all the claims the VPN service makes. I would not trust Mozilla’s app on Linux regarding compatibility but only Mullvad’s. Even then, I would prefer setting it up manually via Wireguard via the terminal with the kill switch enabled for maximum and 100% certainty of it not leaking traffic outside of the tunnel. And no, as far as I can tell, it does not have feature parity with Mullvad. --- ## Post 12 by @brivacy — 2025-05-25T18:48:12Z Mozilla vpn is good because it is mullved --- ## Post 13 by @curie — 2025-05-26T03:29:56Z The only reason I was considering this was because of the containers feature it has integrated with Firefox. You can make it so each tab has its own connection. Is that useful at all? Can you implement this with other VPNs? --- ## Post 14 by @anon57862721 — 2025-05-26T03:35:41Z The feature for which you are considering it is not worth the “risk” or the opportunity cost for the feature set you’ll be missing if not getting Mullvad directly. Whether or not it’s useful depends on why and how you want to use this functionality. If you want a simple answer - get Mullvad directly. Trust me.. I’ve asked many of the similar questions when I was first learning about VPNs and I’ve learned enough to tell you this with confidence. --- ## Post 15 by @curie — 2025-05-26T03:48:30Z Ok, thank you so much! I am currently using iVPN, but once my contract runs out I may switch. Have a good day! --- ## Post 16 by @moonwriting — 2025-05-26T16:23:24Z > [@curie](#): > > Can you implement this with other VPNs? Mullvad has a [browser extension](https://mullvad.net/en/download/browser/extension) for Firefox-based browsers that does a similar thing. It has been really helpful in dealing with VPN blocking. --- ## Post 17 by @curie — 2025-05-26T18:05:48Z Thank you! I will try that once I get Mullvad. --- ## Post 18 by @xe3 — 2025-05-26T18:56:13Z > Buying it directly from Mullvad will be much more cheaper. IVPN is also good. That depends, in USD: Pay Monthly: Mullvad VPN is cheaper: $5.70 vs $10 Pay Yearly: Mozilla VPN is cheaper: $60 vs $68 \*_Mullvad bought through Tailscale which has its own pros/cons is $5/mo_ > The only reason I was considering this was because of the containers feature it has integrated with Firefox. You can make it so each tab has its own connection. Is that useful at all? It’s a super cool feature, biggest selling point of MozillaVPN in my opinion (along with using Mullvad on the backend). > Can you implement this with other VPNs? Not to my knowledge. The closest I’ve seen would be Mullvad VPN browser extension’s ability to set different servers per domain, but that isn’t really the same as per container tab. > The feature for which you are considering it is not worth the “risk” or the opportunity cost for the feature set you’ll be missing if not getting Mullvad directly. What specific features are you alluding to? --- ## Post 19 by @anon57862721 — 2025-05-26T20:20:30Z > [@xe3](#): > > What specific features are you alluding to? DAITA, local network sharing, obfuscation, etc. Be advised, I don’t know what the Mozilla app offers exactly but I am guessing since it does not have feature parity of 1:1, these are missing and only present in the Mullvad app? As for the pricing, well, you get a 10% discount for crypto payments so that’s something. --- ## Post 20 by @anonfox — 2025-05-26T21:11:13Z > [@curie](#): > > Does it have good Linux compatibility? They only have a .deb version. > **[How to install Mozilla VPN on a Linux computer | Mozilla VPN Help](https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-install-mozilla-vpn-linux-computer)** > > Download and install Mozilla VPN to connect to the internet through one of our secure servers, keeping your location and online activity private. --- ## Post 21 by @xe3 — 2025-05-27T02:48:55Z > [@anonfox](#): > > They only have a .deb version. alternatively it can be [built from source](https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/mozilla-vpn-client/blob/ab1de7eb64532de5d185e07da52138235097671e/docs/Building/index.md) (or sourced _unofficially_ from the AUR). More interestingly, it [looks like](https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/mozilla-vpn-client/pull/9798) there has been some preliminary groundwork done on making a **flatpak** version, with the goal of publishing it on Flathub eventually. --- ## Post 22 by @TheDoc — 2025-05-27T22:39:53Z > [@xe3](#): > > More interestingly, it [looks like](https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/mozilla-vpn-client/pull/9798) there has been some preliminary groundwork done on making a **flatpak** version, with the goal of publishing it on Flathub eventually. That’d be another +1 for Mozilla VPN since Mullvad seems [unwilling](https://github.com/mullvad/mullvadvpn-app/issues/524) or unable to. Not sure how they’ll get around the [restrictions](https://discourse.flathub.org/t/vpn-mullvad-vpn/2594/12) though. --- ## Post 23 by @xe3 — 2025-05-27T22:50:47Z I don’t have any deep understanding of the ways in which flatpak makes it more difficult or what limitations are introduced, beyond a basic udnerstanding of Flatpak sandboxing and isolation, but it has already been demonstrated to at least be _possible_ for a VPN app to work as a flatpak. There is a working (currently unofficial) ProtonVPN flatpak on Flathub already. I wonder how similar the Mullvad and Mozilla apps are, if they are somewhat similar, it seems that Mozilla publishing a flatpak version might make it more likely that Mullvad would reconsider their stance towards flatpak and build on or borrow from Mozilla’s work. --- ## Post 24 by @xe3 — 2025-05-28T00:57:19Z Followup: I was able to build the flatpak locally, following some of the steps discussed in [this](https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/mozilla-vpn-client/issues/1014#issuecomment-2468491009) github issue. But I don’t actually use or subscribe to Mozilla VPN, so I can’t actually test the connection. But I was able to build, install, and launch the flatpak: ![moz-vpn-selfbuilt-flatpak](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/3/3c90712cbd94a5a8fc30d83b26b5eae72e0a828b.png) --- ## Post 25 by @overuse — 2025-05-28T10:35:43Z The best way to have different proxy for each container is with mozilla vpn with their integration , but you can manually add proxies if your vpn offers socks5/http/htpps proxies , mullvad offers socks5 proxies