4 ms·

I examined this and it appears that you can get the same effect yourself by enabling ETP strict mode, disabling telemetry and suggestions, and installing uBlock

I examined this and it appears that you can get the same effect yourself by enabling ETP strict mode, disabling telemetry and suggestions, and installing uBlock Origin in Firefox, which is a pretty common configuration for a lot of people. I suppose it's easier to just install this and have that already set up, but it's not exactly hard to do this in Firefox for the average HN reader and you most likely /already have/, so this gives you nothing except lagging security updates from an unknown developer.

hnarn 5y ago
If anything, these types of projects should come as some sort of external wrapper to help you compile or configure the software to give you the wanted behavior. I don’t know a lot about how Arch’s AUR works but this seems like something that could be made an AUR package for example with special configuration while still using “base” Firefox to put it together, rather than profiling it as a new product.
- hutrdvnj 5y ago
  It depends on how they plan to diverge from upstream firefox. Given enough source code changes a fork might be justifiable.
  - kaba0 5y ago
    I don’t think “hard forking” a browser of all things is manageable, even for largish companies, let alone a few developer team. Backporting all the security patches is a very expensive process.
- chrisjc 5y ago
  Forgive my ignorance, but couldn't this be done as an extension? (Maybe even withing uBlock Origin itself, if they were to add an option?) Or do extensions not have access to these settings?
  - yosamino 5y ago
    This is exactly the sort of thing one might expect an extension to be able to to, but since the move to web-extensions many of these things aren't possible. For example, you can't change user settings from an extension. Or install other extensions.
    - anonymousnotme 5y ago
      That is part of why FF is having user drops. There should be a way to easily set a bunch of preferences in bulk for privacy/security or whatever one wants.
      - tristor 5y ago
        However, the same is true for all other browsers as well as most are forked from Chromium and also use the web extensions API. What other browser provides more control via extensions? This seems like it's not a reason for users to drop.
        account42 5y ago
        > This seems like it's not a reason for users to drop. It's means people have one less reason for sticking with firefox and means more people will stick with what comes with the OS / what google advertises everywhere / what works better with their favorite websites.
  - NoGravitas 5y ago
    They don't. But honestly, it would be easy enough to have a script/program run to fix the settings while Firefox is not running.
anonymousnotme 5y ago
I also don't see all the excitement about ETP and similar. I have one profile that has javascript and cookies disabled and I do 90% of my browsing via that. I mostly just read text... I have another profile that I use to is less locked down that use that might need cookies and javascript. One can use plugins like noscript and enable on per site basis.
tinus_hn 5y ago
Until Firefox accidentally disables these settings or replaced them with new ones with new defaults, deprecates these plugins or introduces a new privacy invasion.
- nuerow 5y ago
  > Until Firefox accidentally disables these settings or replaced them with new ones with new defaults, deprecates these plugins or introduces a new privacy invasion. Did anything of the sort ever happened at all or are we only entertaining thought experiments?
  - joshspankit 5y ago
    It happens all the time with different OS’, software, games, and apps. I don’t know of a single example of Firefox doing it, but I feel like it’s fair if people are thinking about it as a possibility.
    - nuerow 5y ago
      > I don’t know of a single example of Firefox doing it, but I feel like it’s fair if people are thinking about it as a possibility. This line of reasoning doesn't add anything of value because the same fear mongering applies to LibreWolf and any other project just the same.
      - joshspankit 5y ago
        My intent was not to fearmonger. I agree that anyone could do it (including LibreWolf). My intent was to say that the comment I responded to has a rightful place in these discussions (and further: in any discussion about privacy)

hnarn 5y ago

If anything, these types of projects should come as some sort of external wrapper to help you compile or configure the software to give you the wanted behavior. I don’t know a lot about how Arch’s AUR works but this seems like something that could be made an AUR package for example with special configuration while still using “base” Firefox to put it together, rather than profiling it as a new product.

hutrdvnj 5y ago
It depends on how they plan to diverge from upstream firefox. Given enough source code changes a fork might be justifiable.
- kaba0 5y ago
  I don’t think “hard forking” a browser of all things is manageable, even for largish companies, let alone a few developer team. Backporting all the security patches is a very expensive process.
chrisjc 5y ago
Forgive my ignorance, but couldn't this be done as an extension? (Maybe even withing uBlock Origin itself, if they were to add an option?) Or do extensions not have access to these settings?
- yosamino 5y ago
  This is exactly the sort of thing one might expect an extension to be able to to, but since the move to web-extensions many of these things aren't possible. For example, you can't change user settings from an extension. Or install other extensions.
  - anonymousnotme 5y ago
    That is part of why FF is having user drops. There should be a way to easily set a bunch of preferences in bulk for privacy/security or whatever one wants.
    - tristor 5y ago
      However, the same is true for all other browsers as well as most are forked from Chromium and also use the web extensions API. What other browser provides more control via extensions? This seems like it's not a reason for users to drop.
      - account42 5y ago
        > This seems like it's not a reason for users to drop. It's means people have one less reason for sticking with firefox and means more people will stick with what comes with the OS / what google advertises everywhere / what works better with their favorite websites.
- NoGravitas 5y ago
  They don't. But honestly, it would be easy enough to have a script/program run to fix the settings while Firefox is not running.

anonymousnotme 5y ago

I also don't see all the excitement about ETP and similar. I have one profile that has javascript and cookies disabled and I do 90% of my browsing via that. I mostly just read text... I have another profile that I use to is less locked down that use that might need cookies and javascript. One can use plugins like noscript and enable on per site basis.

tinus_hn 5y ago

Until Firefox accidentally disables these settings or replaced them with new ones with new defaults, deprecates these plugins or introduces a new privacy invasion.

nuerow 5y ago
> Until Firefox accidentally disables these settings or replaced them with new ones with new defaults, deprecates these plugins or introduces a new privacy invasion. Did anything of the sort ever happened at all or are we only entertaining thought experiments?
- joshspankit 5y ago
  It happens all the time with different OS’, software, games, and apps. I don’t know of a single example of Firefox doing it, but I feel like it’s fair if people are thinking about it as a possibility.
  - nuerow 5y ago
    > I don’t know of a single example of Firefox doing it, but I feel like it’s fair if people are thinking about it as a possibility. This line of reasoning doesn't add anything of value because the same fear mongering applies to LibreWolf and any other project just the same.
    - joshspankit 5y ago
      My intent was not to fearmonger. I agree that anyone could do it (including LibreWolf). My intent was to say that the comment I responded to has a rightful place in these discussions (and further: in any discussion about privacy)