What's this provide that LibreWolf doesn't?
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
6 points (59.4% liked)
Opensource
4374 readers
459 users here now
A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!
⠀
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It does split screen between tabs, it's faster in my experience, it has something called essential tabs that is useful from an UI point of view. I like it's customization. It has the ability to manually unload tabs
I use Zen as well, but I dont like the idea of calling any browser fork "privacy focused". It only takes one malicious update and your entire online life can be exfilled to wherever.
You can sue Mozilla/Google/MS (maybe unsuccessfully, depends on functional courts) if something goes wrong there, you cannot sue a random github repo.
I max the settings on strictest privacy and I have extensions to manage the voids that may be there
Won't help if the browser exfils your data. You have to trust the browser no matter what.
Have you found an actual flaw in privacy?
The attack surface is the flaw. The chain of trust is the flaw/risk.
Who's behind the project? Who has control? How's the release handled? What are the risks and vulnerabilities of the entirely product delivery?
It's much more obvious and established/vetted with Mozilla. With any other fork product, you first have to evaluate it yourself.
No, this is (to my knowledge anyway) a theoretical problem. But it is very much a real risk, as demonstrated by the xz backdoor.
We should be very careful who we trust, especially for browsers, because a compromise could be catastrophic.
I'm always cautious of all software. So fair warning
its not really privacy or security focused bit librewolf and mullvad browsers are