• kyub@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Both are good. Librewolf is more like vanilla Firefox, just configured way better by default. Mullvad Browser is like a port of the Tor Browser (also based on Firefox) for the clear web (or for use with Mullvad’s VPN, or whatever). Also configured very well by default. Mullvad Browser has better anti fingerprinting stuff built-in but as a result of its unusual configuration some sites might be broken. Librewolf is kind of the opposite in that regard - sites won’t be broken but you’ll be easier to fingerprint. In any case, they both are at the top of the best Firefox variants I’d say.

    • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Librewolf and Torbrowser both include hardening and privacy optimizations.

      Kind of separately, but Librewolf, Mull (Android) often take the configs of Torbrowser.

      So calling them opposite makes no sense. They may just leave out some settings.

      • kyub@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The “opposite” was just referring to those 2 aspects - Mullvad has stronger anti-fingerprinting which leads to more breakage. Librewolf has that aspect reversed. Of course, both browsers are similar overall. That’s just one detail where they prioritize differently.

        • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think “reversed” and “opposite” makes no sense here.

          Librewolf copies the Torbrowser or Arkenfox patches, maybe adding their own ones, maybe not. Arkenfox is a 1:1 copy of Torbrowser to my knowledge, without using private browsing.

          As you dont have Cookie Containers, the “being more private” or “anti fingerprinting” is a very vague statement. If you use your browser for a single website then yes maybe.

  • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Librewolf uses Torbrowser configs, Mull uses the Torbrowser repo and entire config.

    Torbrowser always uses the private browsing mode, which is really restrictive. Tabgroups do not work, cookies cannot be saved etc.

    This makes MullvadBrowser way worse for daily browsing.

    Torbrowser cannot use normal browsing mode, because they want to avoid saving data on the disk. Everything is in RAM.

  • Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    Librewolf comes packaged by my distro (GNU Guix) so that’s what I use. I’m sure most “privacy” or “hardened” Firefoxes are more or less interchangeable. The only one that’s really noteworthy is GNU IceCat, because it’s more focused on software-freedom and includes the LibreJS addon, but I switched to Librewolf once it was packaged for Guix.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago
    • trust: The biggest trust factor difference to me is, who manages the package and how it is installed. Both are not packaged by my distribution maintainers, therefore I have trust issues with a program that important. However both are available as Flatpak. So I would recommend to install it this way.
    • updates: Another big factor is how often these are updated, especially security patches. In example for any Firefox based browser, I would not want to wait longer than 1 day before the fork is on the same version as the mainline Firefox.

    I personally would prefer LibreWolf over Mullvad, because it is based off Firefox.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I like LibreWolf, but I don’t like that it wipes cookies and session tokens each time you launch it. I understand why they do it, but it’s a consideration outside my threat model, so it just annoys me.

  • jaxiiruff@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Honestly at this point, normal firefox with ublock and custom user agent switched to chrome.

    • geoma@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      The thing is youre telking websites you are using chrome so theyll look at their stats and say "everybody ises chrome, lets just design for chrome "

      • jaxiiruff@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I know im just tired of stuff breaking on purpose just because of the stupid fingerprinting user agent

        • punseye@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Maybe there should be a addon that enables chrome agent only when one visits a chrome dependent website?

          • geoma@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            You cant twll if some sites need it, unless you try it. I jave never needed a chrome user agent. Only time I needed to change user agent is a fkng website that only let me in if I was on windows. It fidnt care about the browser user agente. It cared for the os user agent.

  • sunzu@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just uses the one that works best for you.

    They are about the same, ie good.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve had Mullvad installed for around a year or more. I turn to it from time to time when I wanna keep things separate from my regular browser, like if I’m looking into items on Amazon that I only need once and don’t want recommendations to get polluted. For example, I was looking at the price of spinning platter HDs after one failed in a NAS. I don’t want Amazon trying to sell me more old-tech drives once I replace it.

    Has worked well so far. Haven’t tried the other one.

    • isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No, mull is a fork of Firefox meant for android and developed by the divestOS team, while mullvad is a completely different fork, only for desktop atm and developed by mullvad (the VPN company)

      they both focus on privacy and integrate Tor patches and modify some configs to better resist fingerprinting, but mullvad browser goes a step further with the tor integration, going as far as storing all data in RAM, so it deletes every cookie, history etc on restart. Could be an advantage, could be a disadvantage, up to you

      • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thanks for such a detailed response. Saw someone commenting it as mull and in thought I relied to them. Once again thanks a lot.

      • toastal@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        IIRC it might be on by default (tho this would hurt anonymity if you can request JXL files & stock Fx cannot), else open about:config & search for “jxl”. Upstream has kept this flag—toggle on or off—only working in Fx Nightly.

  • dino@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Firefox + Arkenfox … :P Using Mullvad as a backup before having to use chromium for any dirty stuff. Librewolf seems to be like a good recommendation for non-technical people. Although I am not sure which browser has less breakage Mullvad or Libre.