Firefox is new evil?

WhiteWolf

Recently Firefox changed their policies, a lot of discussions going on about privacy in IT world like known YouTubers talking:

I have always two browser, first one is Brave, second was always Firefox as I want to isolate some fingerprinting:

So using two browser for me is best way for privacy. First for google/facebook and second for other stuff.
I was wondering, will Solus add additional fork of Firefox to repo? Or is it just too much? If Firefox decides to behave like google will it be maybe replaced?
I know that there are other options, recently I tried GNOME Web but some pages don't load and overall I have problems with it.

diagnostics0

I'll share what I found to be a great and tidy explanation of the Firefox changes and why people are over reacting:

Firefox's updated Terms of Service (ToS) has been causing a stir, but let's break down what's actually changed. Mozilla introduced a ToS for Firefox for the first time, along with an updated Privacy Notice, to make their commitments to users more transparent and accessible.
The main concern was a clause that seemed to give Mozilla ownership of user data. However, Mozilla clarified that this was a misunderstanding. The license is necessary for Firefox's basic functionality, such as processing information typed into the browser. It does not give Mozilla ownership of user data or the right to use it for anything other than what's described in the Privacy Notice.

Here are the key points of the updated ToS:

Data Usage: Mozilla collects data to make Firefox functional and sustainable, improve user experience, and keep users safe. Some optional features may require additional data collection.

User Control: Users have control over their data and can review and adjust their settings at any time.

Ownership: Mozilla does not claim ownership of user data. The license is limited to operating Firefox and providing services to users.

Mozilla has also emphasized that they don't sell or buy user data, and their goal is to provide transparency and accountability.

TL;DR Mozilla updated the wording in their TOS and people got spooked by talking heads on the internet.

Staudey

diagnostics0 Mozilla has also emphasized that they don't sell or buy user data, and their goal is to provide transparency and accountability.

Well, that's just not true. They explicitly allow selling data now, as stated in their own post:

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

Whatever they do with whatever part of their user data, at least some of it seems to change hands to third parties "in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

They (partly) explain:

In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar. We set all of this out in our Privacy Notice. Whenever we share data with our partners, we put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share is stripped of potentially identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

But the fact that it took so much pressure for them to give even this not exactly hugely detailed answer is slightly concerning.

Solarmass

Yes.

how it started: pocket crap, telemetry enabled by default
how it ended:

Mozilla has acquired ads company Anonym founded by former Meta/Facebook executives
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-anonym-raising-the-bar-for-privacy-preserving-digital-advertising
Mozilla silently added PPA (ads tracking API) to Firefox. They did same thing as Google with their Flock/topics tracking in chrome.
they changed Terms of Service

I am still using Firefox with all that crap disabled until a good (non-chromium) alternative appear. Out of all chromium browsers I can only use Vivaldi.

zmaint

Mullvad has a browser available as a flatpak. https://mullvad.net/en/browser

brent

zmaint Mullvad has a browser available as a flatpak. https://mullvad.net/en/browser

When MS funds 75% of you it means every 6 months there's a thread like this with someone questioning a possibly unethical move by FF.

It got to the point I refused to deal with the hassles anymore of staying on top of my own FF security--it was a battle.

I uninstalled it finally from Solus last week...i stopped using it late last year. I can be confident if FF does anything boneheaded LibreWolf and Mullvad with either undo it, disable it, or rip it out.

It's entirely easy to find a fork(s) who has your back. And I have no real complaint or comment about possible firefox ethics lapses. I'm only posting to say how insanely easy it was to walk away from this nonsense.

WhiteWolf

zmaint will give it a try although I hate flatpaks
Anyone used Zen browser? I see hype about it but how's about privacy?

zmaint

brent They lost me back when they came out in open and active support of censorship of "disinformation"... only to later find out that the vast majority of it was correct and the side they were on was almost entirely wrong. Censorship is never the answer and that turned out to be case in point.

“To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker. It is just as criminal to rob a man of his right to speak and hear as it would be to rob him of his money.”
― Frederick Douglass

penny-farthing

brent

It's problematic, indeed.

But why do most Linux distributions (including Solus) have chosen Firefox for their installation kit?

Quite simply, because this web browser, which is supposed to respect the privacy of its users, is maintained by a foundation, Mozilla, which is a legal entity. This gives for this application a certain durability.

Of course, fork applications such as Librewolf, Mullvad, Floorp (the list is not exhaustive) have brought improvements, notably in terms of confidentiality. But they are maintained by passionate developers, sensitive to the open source philosophy. But what about their medium- or even long-term future?

The debate remains open...

alfisya

WhiteWolf I use Zen but not because of privacy reason, I just like the features. It is still in beta and many things are still unstable, so keep that in mind when trying it. That being said their privacy policy looks quite simple. They said they disable as many telemetry as they can by default.

brent

penny-farthing Of course, fork applications such as Librewolf, Mullvad, Floorp (the list is not exhaustive) have brought improvements, notably in terms of confidentiality. But they are maintained by passionate developers, sensitive to the open source philosophy.

It's these "passionate devs" that make Linux a great experience.

"But what about their medium- or even long-term future?"

That never looks good and often ends up in broken hearts, I am being serious. A guy I know online lost a distro he loved and had contributed to for years (a deb knockoff called Lillidog) because the owner couldn't do it all himself these days. He is saddened by it. The distro is alive but minimal.

It certainly is open for debate, you are entirely correct. If the community ever Anoints a Single Standard Unified Linux Desktop (likely deb) then corporate money will come, it will eventually be unrecognizable (embrace extinguish), and most fringe projects abandoned high and dry, and a much bigger profile and market share will ensue for Linux.
--Most of this is my nightmare, but not all of it.