This is a specific case.
This is a specific case.
I think “reversed” and “opposite” makes no sense here.
Librewolf copies the Torbrowser or Arkenfox patches, maybe adding their own ones, maybe not. Arkenfox is a 1:1 copy of Torbrowser to my knowledge, without using private browsing.
As you dont have Cookie Containers, the “being more private” or “anti fingerprinting” is a very vague statement. If you use your browser for a single website then yes maybe.
Strange, yes you are right
The article is very outdated and possibly not complete. ChromeOS uses Linux so you can assume it is very secure there.
I miss a debunk on the exact points by firefox devs.
But people everywhere told me madaidans article is not correct. Torbrowser also still doesnt use Chromium for various reasons. And that is the most security critical browser there is.
This. Fixed it up
Ublue’s
I hate apostrophes :/
If you do interesting stuff, use a good VPN. But those will also have to either delete their logs (Wireguard is actually worse here) or be brave.
Or Tor…
Nobody asking themselves how they got all these details of that person?
Reddit doesnt require a full name.
Secureblue ships Chromium, is lead by a single person and does not care about privacy “if it leads to worse security” (i.e. preinstalling Chromium and removing Firefox, even though there is no evidence that Chromium is more secure, it may likely be less secure)
Well either uBlue’s “variant focus” got too much or you are just really lazy
Librewolf uses Torbrowser configs, Mull uses the Torbrowser repo and entire config.
Torbrowser always uses the private browsing mode, which is really restrictive. Tabgroups do not work, cookies cannot be saved etc.
This makes MullvadBrowser way worse for daily browsing.
Torbrowser cannot use normal browsing mode, because they want to avoid saving data on the disk. Everything is in RAM.
Librewolf and Torbrowser both include hardening and privacy optimizations.
Kind of separately, but Librewolf, Mull (Android) often take the configs of Torbrowser.
So calling them opposite makes no sense. They may just leave out some settings.
It is semi-rolling. They ship different point releases and kernels within a release
No, Fedora is semi-rolling with less random freezes. Regular Ubuntu is similar but just not Ubuntu please.
Fedora also had 13 months of support so staying on the older version gives an extra stability.
And then there is OpenSUSE slowroll, which is CI/CD with more testing
Fedora Atomic has no liveUSB
Yes I think you mentioned the relevant points here. Ubuntu tests their preinstalled software, while there is tons more in the repos that is not as tested. Same with Mint.
And they backport only stuff they think is necessary. For example Plasma 5 is based on the EOL Qt5 and backporting things to Plasma 5 is nearly impossible as you need real Plasma devs and nobody really wants to do that.
Plasma 6 is really stable, 6.1 not so much, but the timing was not perfect. Simply because they do their release schedule as fixed as that.
It is a total pain if you simply want working software, as they may backport some stuff, but all the stuff not preinstalled, or that is very complex, will not get fixes.
This is the same with all stable distros, if the maintainers dont literally maintain all the software there is.
And way more reliability, even though it is pretty modified.
This.