@Lukas true 
But still, why Adobe? Is it because you think its only available on Windows? No, its NOT.
Ubuntu also uses AppArmor policies by default, not sure if downstream Debian/Ubuntu derivatives use it. @Eazy If you absolutely need a Debian based distribution, at least somewhat focussed on security, Ubuntu is a good choice.
This is useless: use aastatus to see how it is only enforcing for like a dozen programs.
Meanwhile Fedora confines most system daemons by default via SELinux and is moving towards further sandboxing them using systemd-execâs features (systemd-analyze security).
1 Like
For Signal, Proton and Element you could install the Flatpak version. Theyâre not official though but repackaged from the .deb files. If that is an issue, then instead of Element you can install a different Matrix client thatâs âofficialâ on Flathub, such as Fluffychat, NeoChat or Fractal (or even Mozilla Thunderbird!)
Alternatively, you can use Distrobox to set up an Ubuntu container and install the apps in there and use distrobox-export to integrate them with your host system (i.e. OpenSUSE or Fedora). This would work perfectly fine for an app like Signal or Element.
For VPNs specifically, you can also create a Wireguard or OpenVPN profile (e.g. on the Mullvad website) and set that up directly without using an app. The KDE Plasma desktop can import a VPN configuration file with one click in the System Settings, and the Gnome desktop probably has the same ability.
Also, as you mentioned, you can try installing a Fedora RPM on OpenSUSE, which tends to work, but not always. (Itâs a general Linux problem; a DEB for Ubuntu might also fail to work on Debian,)
Otherwise I agree with other posters that Ubuntu (or Kubuntu if you prefer KDE) is the best choice. Itâs got the widest app support as you have noticed, itâs run by a commercial entity with real responsibility for its customers, and you can choose between a new release every 6 months (like Fedora) or an long-term support release like (K)Ubuntu 24.04 if you just want security updates.
1 Like
UwUntu.
9 posts were split to a new topic: Why is AppArmor considered useless?
I like ubuntu with my own config that isnât public yet.
But this script is nice:
1 Like
Thanks for sharing, a couple of things there I wasnât even aware. Iâll check it later.
Interesting to see the MS Edge in there. Any particular reason to have it installed?
1 Like
Yeah, in terms of being privacy-invasive as fuck, there is no competition for Edge. They singlehandedly take the first place.
From serving malicious ads on their homepage to sending your browsing data and bookmarks to Microsoft for automatic coupon finding, etc. Theyâre indeed the leaders in what theyâre doing.
Not having E2EE sync is also probably Edge exclusive, because even Chrome has that.
4 Likes
The point is learning the specific quirks of the OS you plan to use. RHEL derivatives use SELinux, Debian derivatives use AppArmor. Usually AppArmor is easier to configure as a MAC but you can learn SELinux too I guess, itâs just more effort.
I use RHEL at work and Debian at home. I have no qualms with Fedora and have used it before and enjoyed the more recent versions of some software. Learning how to deal with MAC is very important if you are focused towards better security along with learning (and being patient) with the usual file permissions, learning virtualization, using the specific techniques and extensions that your processor providers (for example Intel has SGX if any distro supports that, I donât really keep in touch anymore).
From PrivacyGuides own answer, Kicksecure (which isnât a distribution per-say)
https://www.privacyguides.org/en/desktop/#kicksecure
Iâm surprised nobody actually answered the thread main question, and went with all kind of other personal thoughts, suggestions or even suggesting the user to âask an other questionâ by bifurcating them to something else.
1 Like
Canât speak to every answer in this thread, but at least the first three comments do directly address OPâs questions.
1 Like
