The answer to "what is Firefox?" on Mozilla's FAQ page about its browser used to read:

The Firefox Browser is the only major browser backed by a not-for-profit that doesn’t sell your personal data to advertisers while helping you protect your personal information.

Now it just says:

The Firefox Browser, the only major browser backed by a not-for-profit, helps you protect your personal information.

In other words, Mozilla is no longer willing to commit to not selling your personal data to advertisers.

A related change was also highlighted by mozilla.org commenter jkaelin, who linked direct to the source code for that FAQ page. To answer the question, "is Firefox free?" Moz used to say:

Yep! The Firefox Browser is free. Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it, and we don’t sell your personal data.

Now it simply reads:

Yep! The Firefox Browser is free. Super free, actually. No hidden costs or anything. You don’t pay anything to use it.

Again, a pledge to not sell people's data has disappeared. Varma insisted this is the result of the fluid definition of “sell” in the context of data sharing and privacy.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 112 points 1 year ago (21 children)

In Firefox, type about:config in address bar, search for "sponsored" and "telemetry" and set all the paremeters you see from TRUE to FALSE. Done.

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 131 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    We shouldn't have to do workarounds like that in the first place. It's getting to be like the Stockholm syndrome people have about Windows abuses. I didn't put up that shit, and I'm not gonna put up with this either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Seems like a much simpler solution is to just use LibreWolf where all these things are removed from the program already for you. That's the point of the fork.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago*

    I would still suggest folks to at least go through Librewolf's FAQ and Docs. For example, Librewolf disables DNS over HTTPS by default. See https://librewolf.net/docs/faq/#doh-whats-the-stance-on-doh

    If anyone reading this is not configuring their DNS on their routers or on their Linux machines using systemd-resolved or something similar, I suppose they should probably at least configure their browser to use DNS over HTTPS. It should be better than using the default DNS resolver provided by your ISP.

    As far as I'm aware, Librewolf's team isn't making significant changes to Firefox's code or "patching out" some spooky telemetry. Librewolf is essentially pre-configuring a bunch of "privacy" and "security" related settings in Firefox for their users. But alternatively any user can configure these things themeselves and make their own choices. Even pre-installing extensions and add-ons on fresh Firefox profiles can be easily done by any user using Firefox policies (which is what Librewolf uses to pre-install Ublock Origin.) But let's say you also want another extension like Bitwarden to be pre-installed on every fresh Firefox profile. Or you don't trust DuckDuckGo and instead want to configure Firefox to use a self-hosted SearXNG instance as your default search engine. Then maintaining your own Firefox policies can help you do all this.

    I understand it is far simpler and far more desirable to have "privacy and security" out-of-box without having to configure anything at all. But it is probably not a bad idea to take the time to see what configurations you can make to Firefox yourself, even if you decide to use LibreWolf. You may end up wanting your own configurations in addition to what Librewolf's team decides for you.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (12 replies)
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Seems insane that even after disabling all related options in the main settings GUI, there are still like two dozen things enabled in about:config.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    some are subcomponents of the main disabled feature. i checked this on my browser which was only modified by GUI, and nothing i saw 'enabled' was actually enabled, but instead a subfeature of what I had disabled.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (18 replies)
    [–] 66 points 1 year ago

    said Ajit Varma, veep of Firefox Product

    Pack up your shit, and get the FUCK out. You're a fucking disgrace.

  • source
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Given that this is a privacy community, I would think that it would go without saying, But I just like to point out, We should probably disable Firefox sync if were using it. Log out of Firefox accounts in the browser. Even if you're not giving them telemetry they have all that data.

    You can use the x bookmarks sync plugin, Don't make an account with them just use the un-logged in plugin to backup and restore your bookmarks between browsers. On the upside it'll even let you copy bookmarks from Firefox derivatives to Chrome derivatives.

    Go down a comment or two and use Floccus, Just converted it's wonderful

    at their location. However the want it

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Hey, just wanted to point out that xbrowsersync hasn't seen updates for quite some time. I would suggest folks to read this discussion and to perhaps check out Floccus as an alternative.

    Both Floccus and xBrowserSync have Android apps on the F-droid app store as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Alternative to FF Sync?

    I Iove this shit. Send to devices, multiple devices, bookmarks, passwords..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    For sending things to devices I use KDE Connect. I realize it is a fundamentally different application, but it is what I use generally to send / receive links between devices, as well as documents, images etc. It also is good for notification mirroring, and really just integrating Android devices into Windows / Linux computers.

    For passwords I used KeePass (and I sync them between devices with SyncThing), but I usually recommend Bitwarden (which is what I used to use). Both are open source, have apps for all platforms, can integrate into your browser if you choose. The main advantage of Bitwarden is that it is open source, all necessary features are free, and you can host the server yourself if you want. It also integrates into some services, notably email aliasing ones, to allow you to generate new emails every time you make a new account.

    For bookmarks / history your best bet is the extension everyone else is recommending here!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    Soo... where do we go now? What open source alternative exists that is on the side of its users?

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Just keep using Firefox. Nothing in the code has changed, and if it does you can switch to forks. You all are evangelizing about how important FOSS is to prevent this exact scenario and yet you keep switching browsers for no need at all.

    Note: I love Foss, I just think this is an overreaction

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Oh sure, but browsers are an entirely different beast.

    Eventually, they'll take it closed source, now I know what you're thinking "Then one of the forks will just become the dominant one!"

    But here's the thing, the browser engine is very complicated just to keep up with. The W3C spec that all engines must follow is thousands of pages long. So all those forks will wither and die once the engine has been cut off from upstream updates.

    None of those forks touch the engine as-is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    I mean, FOSS doesn't prevent this on its own. We should probably all switch to LW and try to keep an eye that those telemetry settings don't become disabled upstream.

    Also of concern would be anyone using Firefox accounts and sync.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (16 replies)
    [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Soon the only private option left will be to curl the website, read the html and picture it in my head.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Are there any specifics about this? It all seems fairly theoretical to me. What do they [want to] do that contradicts "doesn't sell your personal data" within the context of the fluid definition of "sell"? Do they sell my personal data or don't they? What definitions of "sell" are relevant here?

    It's all sounding a bit Bill Clinton to me: "it depends on your definition of 'is'."

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 21 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Now that Mozilla's fucked. What's the next option that's not Chromium?

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (1 child)
    • Mozilla is sliding down a slippery slope to enshitification; but they're still near the top of that slide. The bad stuff hasn't actually come yet. So Firefox is still top-tier in the short term.
    • In the medium term, we can look towards a fork such as Librewolf or Waterfox.
    • And in the long term, we'll probably turn to a new project using Ladybird or Servo.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 17 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    "Flamed", that's a new one

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • Tim’s an old one, actually. Back in the old internet forum days, flaming was the act of going off on someone during an argument. Most forums even had “no flaming” rules, that could result in warns or outright bans if a mod thought an argument had gotten out of hand.

    To be clear, flaming is the act of insulting the user, not the act of arguing against them. You can argue against a user without attacking the user directly.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›