• meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Firefox is safer and tbh, has probably the best UX and aesthetics out of anyone. Brave is garbage.

    • stifle867@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      As a Firefox user, the only thing Brave does that I wish Firefox would copy is their fingerprinting resistance. I know Firefox does have fingerprinting resistance but it’s nowhere near the same level as Brave.

      • Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        No. Firefox with RFP, Arkenfox user.js, Librewolf or Tor-Browser unifies your fingerprint. Its universal among users. Brave scrambles it, while some may say that is actually not a real fingerprint and can be detected, making you stand out extremely

        • stifle867@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Just to be clear, are you saying Firefox with fingerprinting resistance used in conjunction with Arkenfox user.js provides fingerprint unification, similar to what Tor browser does? I’ll have to check that out.

          I think both approaches are valid tbh. Having a unique fingerprint obviously uniquely identified you, but if it’s randomised then your browsing sessions can’t (in theory) be linked.

          • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            The Chameleon extension could solve some of the fingerprinting issues as it can randomize the browser and OS info that is sent.

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Brave is just a shill for Google mothership. Firefox is leading privacy and security through browsers.

        • zwekihoyy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Firefox has a weaker sandbox than chromium and less mature site isolation and therefore has lower security. privacy is a different story, but remember you’re only as private as you are secure so Firefox is inherently not that private assuming a malicious site escapes the sandbox.

          I’m fully against chrome’s growing monopoly as well as Google surveillance capitalism but let’s not be so dramatic with the “google mother ship” nonsense.

          using chromium as a base does not equal data being sent back to Google, just like using Android as a base doesn’t inherently send data back to Google.