your comment on librewolf?
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
do you know about librewolf?
https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/
Compared to palemoon and basilisk?
https://www.palemoon.org/
https://www.basilisk-browser.org/
Thanks.
I think Librewolf is far preferable to Pale Moon or Basilisk. Pale Moon and Basilisk are based on old versions of Firefox and have a very small developer team, which means there are not many people working on security. They still use the insecure XUL extensions, and their downloads were at one point infected with malware.
On the other hand, LibreWolf rebases on the latest Firefox (which has an actual security team) and only makes some minor changes, so it is similar to Abrowser.
> makes some minor changes
Would you say, for the most part librewolf is
firefox having
a certain configuration?
Yeah, no one should use anything palemoon or basilisk based, now,
https://www.reddit.com/r/palemoon/comments/po6afs/pale_moon_developers_violated_mpl_20_public/
The above link makes me very suspicious about the future of uxp.
Is webextensions good and more secure than XUL? I am not so sure, but the palemoon devs are very untrustworthy. Thus, webextensions is the only way forward apart from more minimalistic web browsers.
And if that wasn't good enough of a reason try this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/palemoon/comments/pexate/pale_moon_developers_abuse_mozilla_public_license/
So, yeah Librewolf it is.
LibreWolf runs with the lowest amount of CPU and memory of any "major" browser that I've tested. However, it does not natively install on Debian-based or Ubuntu-based distros except for those running Debian Unstable. You must be willing to run it with AppImage for the most part. The AppImage does run very well, however, so this is not a big problem.
Abrowser has similar features to LibreWolf, and is also natively installable on almost any Debian-based or Ubuntu-based distro. Its CPU and memory usage tends to be a bit higher. But regardless, it should be anyone's #1 choice.
They both have the advantage that they can run the Chameleon extension, which defeats nearly all attempts at fingerprinting. Palemoon does not have good anti-fingerprinting capabilities or anti-fingerprinting extensions, and so is almost impossible to run without being easily tracked by all the bad people in the world (scroogle, fraudbook, scamazon, microscam, etc.)
> run it with AppImage
and you do not think the appimage is
significantly slower in performance or higher
on use of resources than a deb package
librewolf version would be?
How do you update and look out
for librewolf appimages updates?
> Abrowser has similar features to LibreWolf, and is also natively installable on almost any Debian-based
How would you install abrowser on
debian 10? Abrowser is not made in a way, that for
instance you cannot install addons? Abrowser
does not have major constraints in
usability compared to librewolf appimage?
>"and you do not think the appimage is significantly slower in performance or higher on use of resources than a deb package librewolf version would be?"
In my testing, if you unpack the Appimage and run the "AppRun" executable from within the resulting squashfs-root folder, you'll get the same performance as if you installed a deb package:
chmod +x Librewolf.[version].appimage
./Librewolf.[version].appimage --appimage-extract
cd squashfs-root/
./AppRun
I then link the AppRun file to /usr/local/bin/librewolf, so that I have access to it system-wide.
>"How do you update and look out for librewolf appimages updates?"
I go to the Librewolf appimage gitlab page and sign in to my gitlab account and sign up to be notified of new releases: https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community/browser/appimage
To update, I just download the new appimage, extract it, and re-link the "AppRun" file to /usr/local/bin/librewolf
Librewolf keeps track of all my old preferences across appimage updates.
>"How would you install abrowser on debian 10?"
Download the latest deb file from here: https://archive.trisquel.org/trisquel/pool/main/f/firefox/?C=M;O=D
Install:
sudo apt install ./abrowser.[version].deb
You can also add the Trisquel repo to Debian and do apt-pinning to only add and update Trisquel (no other packages from the Trisquel repo) to your Debian installation. I laid out the steps with Devuan here, they would be basically the same for Debian: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/how-install-abrowser-devuan
>"Abrowser is not made in a way, that for instance you cannot install addons?"
From my testing, Abrowser can accept pretty much all add-ons that Firefox can accept. The Trisquel devs have also added a curated list, which is the best group, and I wouldn't advise people to go outside that list. But I am personally in love with the Chameleon anti-fingerprinting extension, so I add that separately from the Mozilla add-on's page.
>"Abrowser does not have major constraints in usability compared to librewolf appimage?"
Abrowser uses a little bit more memory and CPU than Librewolf. Otherwise they are remarkably similar. Because Abrowser can be installed and routinely updated as a .deb package, it's probably the superior choice for Debian.
If you're installing Abrowser, it's probably better to do it by adding the Trisquel repo and apt-pinning, because this way apt will verify the signatures. Although it is possible that Abrowser will break on Debian because of different library versions than Trisquel.
The changes that Librewolf makes to Firefox are more than just configuration changes, but I do think a lot of the privacy improvements can be achieved this way. The problem is that Mozilla keeps adding new things to disable which you have to keep track of.
>"Although it is possible that Abrowser will break on Debian because of different library versions than Trisquel."
I've run Abrowser on Devuan, antiX, Void, and Hyperbola at various times for about a year and a half now with no problems whatsoever. Should work without a hitch on Debian.
It's important to remember, Abrowser is Firefox with a specific "recipe" for compiling it. Since Firefox works on just about everything, you should be able to get Abrowser to as well. For some distros (Void and Hyperbola), I have to crack open the .deb file and find and manually run the binary. For Debian-based distros I just 'apt install' it, no problem.
It does indeed.
Thanks for reviewing both LibreWolf and AppImage, Andy!
I do not know if the deb package has an update option. I cannot
install the deb package on debian 10. Gdebia says, dependency
is not satisfiable libc6 >= 2.32. Likely why it does not
work, because on debian 10 the libc6 version
number is lower.
The repository is for Debian unstable. Maybe try the one for Ubuntu 20.04.
Librewolf is quite good in terms of privacy. 2 automatic connections, a fake one and another to update ublock origin.
On the other hand, Abrowser connects to shavar.services.mozilla.com or something similar. Anyway, I prefer this one. It runs well on Devuan unstable (Ceres)
Besides, I have a personal user.js in order to avoid automatic connections to anywhere, and some privacy and security improvements, some of them from the arkenfox project.
I am a member!
I talked to the LibreWolf team and they refused to make their package includable in FSDG distros. They are more concerned with security.
--
Caleb Herbert
https://bluehome.net/csh/
Sent from my GrapheneOS device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Well, you need good security for reasonable privacy, so that does seem plausible as a reason to do so.
Also freedom requires reasonable privacy to some extent.
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti