Firefox now a privacy/freedom nightmare, need alternative Gecko browser

[Stogie]

.
Well, Mozilla is completely and utterly ruining Firefox in spectacularly and outrageously bad ways. It'll soon be as bad, or worse, of a privacy nightmare than Chrome is!

I recommend watching this entire video for details and context including their prior terrible decisions and actions that led up to this REALLY terrible decision and action. It's 20 minutes but very much worth it:

You're granting them a worldwide license to use EVERYTHING you ever enter into, or upload through, Firefox. Talk about horrible! Also they now have a new terms of use policy (never had one before!) and related agreements you must accept that are extremely loosely-written and overly-broad so that anything Mozilla doesn't like (politically, etc.) can now be called a violation of the terms of use. If you express an opinion to the right of Karl Marx, they can call it a violation of their new terms of use. I'm serious, watch the video above, he explains it. There is also abusable "weasel language" about disclosing data in response to requests from governments.

So, EasyOS ought to ditch Firefox and provide a fork of it without all the spyware and opinion-control crap. Librewolf perhaps, and I've heard of others (Waterfox, several more). Nobody's sure what those alternatives are going to do yet, but I suspect they won't go along with this completely unacceptable, Google-like "total spying" crap and the control over freedom of expression.

Just wanted to let you all know, especially Barry. It's time for us all to figure out what is the best open-source fork of Firefox, with all this spying and speech-control crap ripped out, that we all need to migrate to. I'm sure Barry will put it into EasyOS for us.

What a sad day. I've been using Firefox since something like 2000-2001 or so, when it was still called Firebird. Now it's ruined, probably forever. Its market share will soon go from tiny to nearly non-existent, and they now richly DESERVE for that to happen.
.

[Stogie]

.
Freshly-released, new updated video about the backlash to this:

For some reason, this guy insists on incorrectly pronouncing Mozilla as "mot-zilla", which is highly annoying. Not sure why he does that.

LibreWolf looks like the way to go, but I'd have to do more research to be sure.

I hope whichever crap-free, evil-removed fork of Firefox ends up being the best, that it'll be put into the EasyOS menus with install and update options, like other browsers have today.
.

[Stogie]

.
Quick video by the Mental Outlaw YouTube channel noting that Mozilla has deleted language, previously in multiple locations, about not selling access to your data. Not a good sign:

[james2]

I've never trusted any of them. Just read of a private group doing an open source browser for privacy. Called Peacock. I doubt Librewolf would be safe. Look at the controls most of them cater to, fingerprinting etc.An off or on button shouldn't even exist for them in a public browser. Australian public and governence has had trouble with US over these matters for decades. Advertisers are the worse intruders and foot in the door salesmen. like being held up.
Need a browser non compliant to corporate and commerce. They own the intel rat pack who thug for them.

[mikewalsh]

I'm going to take the position of "devil's advocate", here. I won't win any prizes among a certain section of our community for doing so, but I believe people need to see the larger picture.

People have been bleating about the need for "openness" and "transparency" for years & years. The trouble is, if it's going to be effective, it's a double-edged sword.

The general attitude seems to be that it's fine, OK and perfectly right (and to be expected) that large organisations - specifically, here, the ones responsible for getting online content onto your screen - should be completely open about HOW they do what they do. Okay, that's fair comment. I think any fair-minded society would expect no less.

The flip side is where the scales begin to tip far more in one direction than the other.

We all know, and understand, what "telemetry" is supposed to be about. In its purest form, it's a means of collecting metrics about how the product a company makes available for public use is in fact USED by the public. Unfortunately, it's been rather abused....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ever since online shopping became a thing, more than a quarter of a century ago, we've all had to experience the inevitable downside. Advertising, to "encourage" us to purchase one product in preference to another. It's been the scourge of whatever popular media humans have used for well over a century.....and the advertising industry is nothing if not adaptable. No matter where you are, or what you're doing, they find ways of pushing adverts in your face.....

The rot, of course, began with Google. Adverts steadily flooded the web, mostly backed by Google (who of course profited enormously). And then it became any data they could get their hands on.....and it wasn't long before the 'data brokers' arose. Naturally, this aspect doesn't sit well with people, because no human likes having stuff "in their faces" all the time.

But this is getting away from the subject matter.

People want openness and transparency from organisations they deal with on a regular basis. But as soon as those organisations request data back from you - in regard to how you, as an individual, are using their product, so that they can improve it and implement the features people most want to see - there's uproar.

Why IS that? Seems a bit "one-sided" to me. It's fine for you to know everything about them.....but totally wrong for them to know the slightest thing about you. It's hardly surprising many have had to resort to behind-the-scenes metric collection, since nobody is prepared to volunteer it.....and then of course, when such practices are inevitably brought into the light of day, they're instantly labelled data theft (because you didn't give your permission).

How else are they ever going to improve the product everyone wants to use if nobody will engage with them?

We're ending up with a society where everybody is suspicious of everybody else. It's not a good place to be in.....and the general public have to at least accept an equal share of the blame for this. We cannot blame the companies & corporations for EVERYTHING, convenient though it may be. Human nature is a strange & capricious thing; it's very true what is said, about "Humans being their own worst enemies"....because no-one ever wants to own up to possibly being in the wrong.

It's ALWAYS the other guy's fault, isn't it?

Mike.

[tammi806]

If guess you want pure privacy than most likely you will have to pay for it if paid privacy browsers even exist.

I've never checked in to paid privacy browsers so I have no idea.

[rcrsn51]

How else are they ever going to improve the product everyone wants to use if nobody will engage with them?

Should that sentiment also apply to Puppy in-house projects? Should there be an expectation that community members will provide testing and feedback in order for projects to survive?

Or is the concept of beta-testing not relevant to a hobby distro like Puppy?

Should the forum act like a perpetual on-line treasure hunt where it doesn't matter if the treasures are old, untested, abandoned, obsolete, incompatible or broken?

[N97]

mikewalsh wrote"People want openness and transparency from organisations they deal with on a regular basis. But as soon as those organisations request data back from you - in regard to how you, as an individual, are using their product, so that they can improve it and implement the features people most want to see - there's uproar."

Thats because TRUST has been violated... Look at the recent GooG/M$ tossing out uBlockOrigin. Look no further. New manifesto " WE run the show... not you !!!"
Frank Zappa said it best ,"You been made a C*****-S******* by proxy."
Puppy NEEDS to be a 3rd Alternative... the way it was... with TRUST in the end user, and things that have a small footprint with infrequent bugfixes because it was tested and made right the first time.
If the end user wants Google/Microsoft without the 'problems' the puppy way has to be learned, not compromised.
"If Nooby can learn it, I can, and so can you." Some old tricks have become new again, thanks to compromises to puppy.
/rant... nuff said.

[darksun]

I recommend you to try this Firefox-based web browser developed by The TOR Browser team (who merged with TAILS) and Mullvad.

For download and info, you find everything here https://mullvad.net/en/download/browser/linux

PS the software is free and open source and does NOT require to be used with a VPN, it is NOT mandatory, only recommend.

[pp4mnklinux]

I recomend u not to use mullvad browser, It is designed with privacy in mind, but it may not be the best fit for everyone. Here are some reasons why I don't want to use it:

No Extensions Allowed – Mullvad Browser is built to minimize fingerprinting, so it discourages or outright disables extensions, which could be a dealbreaker if you rely on password managers, ad blockers, or other add-ons.

Tor-Like Fingerprinting Risks – The browser is designed to make all users look the same, similar to Tor Browser. However, if you use it without a VPN or Tor, its unique fingerprint might actually make you stand out more.

Based on Tor Browser (Without Tor) – If you need actual anonymity, Tor Browser itself might be a better option since it routes traffic through the Tor network. Mullvad Browser is mostly useful when paired with a VPN. (n.b.- Some users (@tammi806 ) defends It is always better use the original than a clone.

I don't care for any Google Chrome / Chromium clone browser and would rather use the real thing instead of a clone.

Not Optimized for Performance – Since it prioritizes privacy over speed and usability, Mullvad Browser may feel slower compared to mainstream browsers like Firefox or Slimjet..

Limited Syncing and Cloud Features – Unlike Firefox or Chrome, it lacks syncing options, meaning you can't easily access bookmarks, passwords, or settings across devices.

Not Ideal for Everyday Browsing – If you frequently log into accounts like Google, social media, or banking sites, using Mullvad Browser could be inconvenient since it's designed to resist tracking and doesn’t support persistent logins well.

Updates Might Be Slower – Because it's based on Tor Browser, security updates might take longer to be implemented compared to mainstream browsers.

Some Sites Might Not Work Properly – Due to its aggressive anti-tracking measures, certain websites might break, requiring you to troubleshoot or switch to another browser.

No Mobile Version – As of now, there's no official Mullvad Browser for mobile devices, limiting its usefulness if you need privacy on the go.

You can look for different users' oppinions, but the best is to try it and decide, those are my oppinions, that's all

Have a nice weekend.

https://scamalytics.com/ip/isp/mullvad ???????? ????????

[N97]

Mullvad is running as user, not root..... priviledge escalation possible.

[darksun]

I hope people new to GNU/Linux that read the last two posts would be able to distinguish between bad information and very bad information.

[Jasper]

for-new-users.png (78.45 KiB) Viewed 589 times

[darksun]

@Jasper I am clicking on those faces but nothing happens. My browser (which is made by my fraudulent ISP Mullvad) either has been possibly escalated to root in my puppy workstation or my ISP is defrauding me with a 44% probability.
Better I switch to the Chinese Slimjet Browser, rumors says it can run in the background, that is cool.

[Jasper]

@darksun

Sorry, it's touch-screen enabled ........ clicking on the image does not work.

what-can-I-say.png (121.68 KiB) Viewed 564 times

rumors says it can run in the background ....

Sounds like a zombie process

[james2]

@darksun
Wikileaks and others reported quite a few years ago that Google has been working on AI with a Chinese company that's tied to China military.
It always pays to remember that no one is allowed to say no to US intel and defense agencies wants. Trouble is you don't have to be evil, criminal or pedophile to get their attention and the global ruling Oligarchy Corporate's who run the war, defence and intel agencies and govts and politics including public deceit and distractions, get rich and control and political control from info gathering. Public governance disappeared some decades ago replaced with the operation mockingbird fanciful scripts over us misrepresenting reality. One of the biggest no no's on the internet is truth telling unfortunately. That brings hits quicker than most other matters.
I think the info about firefox above is nothing most haven't felt existed from many years ago. Corporate and spying over commerce and control, especially for monopoly, profit and political gain is a massive online industry. To me it's no different than someone dragging you out of your house by the hair and knocking your head on their shop and demanding you play along with it. US Federal court in Florida ruled some years ago that the media is ALLOWED to lie to and deceive the public.
On a side note , i have recently had AI gpt put on my phone. Which is a 10 month old 2019 Samsung galaxy that updates ran out some time ago. No one asked. Day after i noticed that, Duck duck go informs me they have also included AI and wanted access to all my files and media. They claim they also will block F/book etc etc from info gathering on my phone. Phone presently is a mess, i cannot send every second email , buttons not working , screen touch playing up etc. Social credit score punishments are just around the corner. Includes truth telling.

[eric52]

I've been using the Zen browser, a Mozilla fork still in beta. It is different. It seems pretty polished. I like it. It's available in AppImage for easy inspection, and it accepts most extensions. I'd be interested if anyone else thinks it's worthwhile.