It gets the job done.
I see too many people just routing Chrome or Opera or some shit via Orbot, which is waaaaaaay worse.
Fenix has no letterboxing so it canāt protect screen/density, but everything else is largely fine.
Test it out using TZP: TZP
Firefox 131 with Brace I get one failure
Mull 131 I get two failures
Tor Browser Desktop & Android 13.5.6 I get no failures
Ah, so the problem is control of the project. Makes sense, although I still prefer companies driving critical, large-codebase, end user facing projects. FOSS maintainers tend to fork and split too eagerly for my taste.
Makes perfect sense, I agree. Thanks for the clarification.
Am I correct in thinking that something like Mulch, Brave, or Vanadium (or even chrome) paired with a decent VPN would be better setup for resisting fingerprinting and having security on Android if Tor network access is not a priority for the person?
I think they meant Google gets into anti-trust lawsuits, and thus divests ( ) itself of Chromium project. I think there is talk of Android being taken away from Google if the US courts put their minds to it (Although it seems unlikely to me).
The source is up there available to everyone. So, without Google and thereās no one who would touch the source despite itās being the most secure browser on earth, due to their ideology with inferior alternatives thatās probably needed to rewrite from scratch, I think just let it be
I migrated to hardend Brave, from Vanadium, because of the content filtering and ability to save bookmarks.
And because I wanted to use something different.
I use it for everything.
For BBB I need MS Edge, but ill try to run it on Vanadium.
Im on GrapheneOS
I use brave, for me the forgetful browsing feature is the most convenient way to role a browser. It forgets anything besides on the websites i whitelisted. That is just symphony. For research stuff I use mullvad browser alongside it.
I just use Brave for everything Android and Windows. I can not be bothered to trouble myself with Arkenfox any longer. I always forgot what the niche use cases of Mullvad and Tor are so I need to re-read the knowledge base for like the tenth time now which I also can not be bothered to do at the moment, so I just use incognito mode on Brave.
Also Firefox is kind of slow on me for some reason, especially with Arkenfox enabled.
Personally, I use Firefox on all devices that I have; on mobile, itās either Firefox Focus or DDG. I do not use my phone long enough to need anything more than that, itās only there to look for some links that my friends have sent me or me looking up something on the fly. I believe itās good enough for my casual usage on phone.
On my computer (all three OS): I use firefox with uBO for mast part, it just works almost everywhere.
If you are the average person, Tor wonāt be necessary especially with the reduced speeds. Mullvad Browser is geared more towards average person threat models without sacrificing browsing speed. Also note that you can use any VPN with it.
When you use Mullvad Browser, you are essentially switching to a two-browser model. For example, Brave/Firefox for logging into sites and Mullvad for browsing sites that donāt require login and you maintain anonymity. It can take some time getting used to switching back and forth between browsers during browsing sessions.
What do people think about Beta versions of web browsers. These are the examples Iām referring to:
There are even āNightly Buildsā available.
I ask this question because Iāve never seen it addressed anywhere in PrivacyGuides history.
I know Beta Apps arenāt complete and maybe insecure but then again, Google uses beta versions of Linux for their servers.
Iām just worried that Beta web browsers are sending back telemetry which may be for the noble purpose of fixing bugs but this may also mean that Beta web browsers are sending back personal user data as well.
How? If thatās possible, is that mean someone could get filed from using FOSS?
In this context, why is Chromium not a true FOSS? Is there anything wrong in the sourceās license that could convince you to believe thatās the case?
Thereās no point in beta browsers unless youāre a developer and interested in doing some testing. Also not sure why you included Chrome as an option. Just because itās beta doesnāt make it any less privacy invasive. The same criteria for browsers applies to the beta versions, and according to PG Chrome does not meet that criteria.
I tend to, opt-in to beta testing most of the time. But not with web browsers.
With browsers I stick to the stable branch as a daily driver and use nightly for testing and to keep up with what features and fixes are being working on, what is changing, and so on.
One reason you may not want to run beta or nightly browsers (if you use a browser that takes fingerprinting seriously) is you are placing yourself into a much smaller group of users, with a probably somewhat unique fingerprint.
Iām just worried that Beta web browsers are sending back telemetry
Personally, I often opt to enable telemetry or at least manually provide feedback/bug reports with Beta or Alpha/Nightly stuff (if it is open source and I trust the developer). Its a small thing, but I like to at least try to contribute to the development and improvement of the software that I like (and receiving real world feedback is part of the purpose of open beta testing)
Telemetry mostly became a bad word because shitty big tech companies abused it, but it isnāt in and of itself bad. Often, as you noted, it is for a useful and noble purpose (making software better). Iām trying to re-calibrate my own mindset about Telemetry to reflect the fact that I have reasonable trust in most of the software I use, and have a shared interest in wanting to improve that software.