4 ms·
While I agree that Chrom(e|ium) sandboxing and the backing of Google's security teams make it a security leader, I'm torn between Chrome/Chromium and Firefox be
by kobayashi 10y ago
While I agree that Chrom(e|ium) sandboxing and the backing of Google's security teams make it a security leader, I'm torn between Chrome/Chromium and Firefox because of privacy considerations. For example, privacytools.io recommends Firefox for reasons such as its tweak-ability, and because WebRTC can be disabled so that when using a VPN, the originating IP isn't leaked. Other tweaks include the ability to disable both the disclosure of battery status and clipboard events.
I'd love to get your opinion on the trade-offs between the current un-sandboxed version of Firefox, and Chrome/Chromium.
Edit: Also, thegrugq[0] recommends against using Safari, but makes no mention of Firefox. While Safari is not atop my list of privacy or security focussed browsers, I'm somewhat surprised to see if specifically mentioned as one to be avoided. If you agree with him, why is that? In my view, it's not terrible because it doesn't support WebRTC, a user can disable plugins, and because WebGL can also be disabled. While it can't run HTTPS everywhere nor a random user agent spoofer, JSB5 seems pretty good for a javascript blocker and uBlock (while no longer under development) still works rather well.
[0] https://gist.github.com/grugq/353b6fc9b094d5700c70 https://gist.github.com/grugq/353b6fc9b094d5700c70
- viraptor 10y agoFor webrtc there's always https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-network-limiter/npeicpdbkakmehahjeeohfdhnlpdklia https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-network-lim...
- kobayashi 10y agoI haven't before seen that extension, though privacytools.io categorically states: "There is no known working solution [to fix the WebRTC Leak in Google Chrome], only a plugin that is easily circumvented. Please use Firefox instead." Do you have reason to believe that they're mistaken?
- viraptor 10y agoNo, I haven't seen this note. If they don't post details about how it can be "easily circumvented", it's hard to really reason about it. For what it's worth, their test does not "easily circumvent" this extension.
- kobayashi 10y agoSeems to work, and it looks to be from a trustworthy source, so that's a plus. Do you happen to know about a reputable way to disable WebGL?