Mozilla and Firefox has turned into evil and lie to their userbase. Leave it and go for alternatives

[testaccount66766]

I was with you until the part where you said Brave was the worst privacy-respecting browser. I am notably confused even after reading the article and your analysis. Why? How is it any worse than Chrome, Edge or even Firefox?

Other browser alternatives I suggest reviewing are Epic Privacy Browser, GNU Icecat, Iridium, and Vivaldi.

 

[Dixel]

16 hours ago, testaccount66766 said:

I was with you until the part where you said Brave was the worst privacy-respecting browser. I am notably confused even after reading the article and your analysis. Why?

You mean this fake/scam browser "brave" ?

"Despite explicitly opting out of telemetry, every few secs a request to: “variations.brave.com”, “laptop-updates.brave.com” which despite its name isn’t just for updates and fetches affiliates for brave rewards, with pings such as grammarly, softonic, uphold e.g. Despite again explicitly opting out of brave rewards. There’s also “static1.brave.com”

https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/nxce6t/brave_browser_scam_a_fake_privacy_browser_sharing/

That's "why".

 

[Dixel]

16 hours ago, testaccount66766 said:

Other browser alternatives I suggest reviewing are Epic Privacy Browser, GNU Icecat, Iridium, and Vivaldi.

I'm sorry , I shan't comment on this since this topic is about how awful Mozilla/Firefox is. 

[testaccount66766]

28 minutes ago, Dixel said:

You mean this fake/scam browser "brave" ?

"Despite explicitly opting out of telemetry, every few secs a request to: “variations.brave.com”, “laptop-updates.brave.com” which despite its name isn’t just for updates and fetches affiliates for brave rewards, with pings such as grammarly, softonic, uphold e.g. Despite again explicitly opting out of brave rewards. There’s also “static1.brave.com”

https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/nxce6t/brave_browser_scam_a_fake_privacy_browser_sharing/

That's "why".

 

The Brave Team did respond back with this:

https://old.reddit.com/r/brave_browser/comments/nw7et2/i_just_read_a_post_on_rprivacytoolsio_and_wtf/h18fxec/

I guess one can take it with a grain of salt, as they can be seen as trying to defend themselves. I have never had issues with it, I only use it for the BAT it gives you.

26 minutes ago, Dixel said:

I'm sorry , I shan't comment on this since this topic is about how awful Mozilla/Firefox is. 

OP suggested to add alternatives they may have missed

 

 

[Nokiamies]

16 hours ago, testaccount66766 said:

Brave was the worst privacy-respecting browser Why worse than Chrome, Edge or even Firefox?

I said out of so called privacy options it is worst. Did I mention Chrome or Edge as alternatives? No. Many fall for Brave after Firefox thinking it is more private and secure and close their ears from facts. You choose trust some other evil than before but wont get rid of the evil.

Few interesting facts like here that may also interest @Dixel

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/brave.html

here was some analysis from Brave on it default settings.

http://tilde.club/~acz/shadow_wiki/browsers.xhtml#Brave

here some more

and if I did not prove enough here is last nail to coffin related to your comment

1 hour ago, testaccount66766 said:

I have never had issues with it, I only use it for the BAT it gives you.

You need account on uphold which privacy policy states

Quote

To verify your identity, we collect your name, address, phone, email, and other similar information. We may also require you to provide additional Personal Data for verification purposes, including your date of birth, taxpayer or government identification number, or a copy of your government-issued identification

that is same level of surveillance as Facebook for me. That is not anonymous or privacy respecting at all. If they did not do payment system to respect privacy can you trust anything else they say.

1 hour ago, testaccount66766 said:

I guess one can take it with a grain of salt

take everything on internet with grain of salt even my sayings. My sayings are based on my and others research. I compare my test results to ones mentioned on websites. I do them on lab network with MITMproxy.

And I can say Brave is as evil or even more evil than Mozilla. It is shilled everywhere for and they usually defend it with "Mozilla does bad things too". If someone does bad things it does not justify others to do bad things. If someone else steal car am I allowed steal one too? No.

Brave, Mozilla Firefox, Protonmail etc. are mostly aimed for privacy normies so they can think they are on super secure platform that respect their privacy. Once you evolve with your technican knowledge you understand there is no such as privacy respecting provider. All that say so are liars. You wont trust any provider to handle your private stuff.

16 hours ago, testaccount66766 said:

Other browser alternatives I suggest reviewing are Epic Privacy Browser, GNU Icecat, Iridium, and Vivaldi.

First one I never heard about but that name suggest it is not private at all. Well I need fire up my lab again.

GNU icecat is okayish but I rather recommend librewolf. Only thing it adds is libreJS that can also be downloaded other browsers. And librejs is pretty useless for privacy actually as it only cares from javascript licence and not what JS does in your system.

 

Iridium got one problem that developers wont address and that is google safebrowsing

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/iridium.html

That still exist on latest version of iridium. Why safe browsing is issue? Since browser needs to connect on Google servers to download file and that means excess connection. Also developers refuse to address issue saying "it only downloads them for local use". Safebrowsing always been obsolete since malware sites got so many domains ready. Once safebrowsing blocks one they add another.

 

Vivaldi is huge red flag too. Here some more sauce to support my findings

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/vivaldi.html

It sends telemetry that includes your profile unique ID, screen resolution and your IP. That is same fingerprinting as other violators.

Also their developers don't care about user concerns.

And forget about building it from source since there is no full source code that makes it not to be open source.

 

So what browsers I should use?

If you really need to use big browser use either Ungoogled Chromium or Librewolf (Firefox based).

If you want something else UXP browsers like Palememe and and Basilik based browsers are great alternatives. Though vanilla versions have started limit user control but many forks still respect.

And do not fall for built in privacy protections scam. Remember that developers whitelist trackers many times from built in protections.

Use your own set of privacy addons like Umatrix/Ematrix, Decentraleye, Nocript, Ublock origin that gives you much better privacy.

2 hours ago, Dixel said:

I'm sorry , I shan't comment on this since this topic is about how awful Mozilla/Firefox is. 

I welcome any actually privacy respecting browsers to be listed at end of first post. We need to give them that alternative I told to go for. And it does not have to be for "latest and (not so) greatest" OS.

Lets take example from ff52 that is latest on XP and Vista with offical support. It got plenty of telemetry built in already like you know. And yes I know Windows phones home but I mitigated most of it on my personal rig and it is not as bad as with windows 10 or 11.

Palememe based browsers are way better alternative or go minimal like Netsurf.

I asked your opinion for other legacy supporting that non spyware browsers since you got experience with Chromium under older Windows versions.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Mr.Scienceman2000
if I cant learn not to do typos I will win Dixel on them

[D.Draker]

I was on Firefox for some time and I still sometimes use ver. 78 , but it's a total nightmare , it's not only not private , it's terribly inconvenient ! 

[D.Draker]

19 hours ago, testaccount66766 said:

Epic Privacy Browser

When they tell you something, it's actually not what they name it . Here,  let me help you with translation : Epic Privacy Browser = Epic Privacy Failure Browser. Besides , it can't use extensions , so a hard pass for me. How am I supposed to use a browser that doen't allow extensions , it's just nonsense . What about no-script and the such ?

[Nokiamies]

2 hours ago, D.Draker said:

How am I supposed to use a browser that doen't allow extensions , it's just nonsense . What about no-script and the such ?

that plus quick look to their site gave me good enough conclusion. Their site looks like obvious scam site all badges and others and what is funny

Quote

When you use Epic, you protect your freedom to think, to associate, and to investigate. You’re keeping your mind free of any prison except that of openness and curiosity to all people and thought. We’re thrilled and so proud to protect a free internet for hundreds of thousands of users every single day all over the world.

isin't ability to choose addons freedom too?

[Dixel]

7 hours ago, D.Draker said:

Epic Privacy Failure Browser. 

It's just Epic Fail Browser , in fact they all are lately. On the other hand , they actually do what they were designed to do [stealing our data, working against us].

[Dixel]

 Mr.Scienceman2000 , I'd suggest the vetted 360EE 13.0.1106.0 and 360SE 13.5.1030 - both stable and fast . Decentraleyes ... hmmm , I suspect something's wrong with it ,

did you check it's guts yourself ? It shows zero redirects for me. Does the author can be trusted ?

[Nokiamies]

8 minutes ago, Dixel said:

On the other hand , they actually do what they were designed to do [stealing our data, working against us collecting our data for our own benefit]

sorry just could not resist to edit it like that. "This completely false sectence has been corrected by Mozilla thinkright technology" That is what many actually think from telemetry. Also it is not needed even to improve product. You can ask feedback on project forum or anywhere else.

8 minutes ago, Dixel said:

 Mr.Scienceman2000 , I'd suggest the vetted 360EE 13.0.1106.0 and 360SE 13.5.1030 - both stable and fast .

I need give those shot on my lab before can recommend. Though I pretty much trust your word over this I want do my own testing always.

9 minutes ago, Dixel said:

Decentraleyes ... hmmm , I suspect something's wrong with it ,

did you check it's guts yourself ? It shows zero redirects for me. Does the author can be trusted ?

do you have umatrix or ematrix? You need add following rules

Quote

* ajax.aspnetcdn.com script allow

* ajax.googleapis.com script allow

* ajax.microsoft.com script allow

* ajax.proxy.ustclug.org script allow

* cdn.jsdelivr.net script allow

* cdnjs.cloudflare.com script allow

* code.jquery.com script allow

* libs.baidu.com script allow

after that is should redirect. By default it conflicts with uMatrix.

[Sampei.Nihira]

Hi to all.

A colleague would like to know if UBO installed in 360 is able to use the rule "removeparam="
Thanks to whoever will answer me.

[Dixel]

@Mr.Scienceman2000

1 - Thank you , I appreciate you trust me .

2 - I don't have umatrix , also I read it's kaput .

https://www.ghacks.net/2020/09/20/umatrix-development-has-ended/

[Dixel]

3 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

Hi to all.

A colleague would like to know if UBO installed in 360 is able to use the rule "removeparam="
Thanks to whoever will answer me.

Hi , from what I know , 360 behaves as a usual 86 chrome when working with extensions. I don't think it would be any different with UBO.

[Nokiamies]

15 minutes ago, Dixel said:

 

2 - I don't have umatrix , also I read it's kaput .

https://www.ghacks.net/2020/09/20/umatrix-development-has-ended/

i use Ematrix UXP which is actively supported

and strange it did not work on you. What plugins you got for blocking? Maybe some other does