Web browsers are synonymous with the internet, as they serve as a user-friendly means to interact with the online world. Users who care about their privacy usually switch to options like LibreWolf, Brave, Firefox, and Mullvad Browser.
At the same time, the debate over Brave vs. Firefox is a longstanding one, and now it appears that the conversation has taken a rather spicy turn following Firefox's post on Brave.
Let's see what's happening. 😳
Brave Hits Back: Slams Firefox Over Claims
This is some severe mental gymnastics from charlatans at the Firefox propaganda dept with this one.
Debunking Firefox's claims that Brave was an ill-equipped browser, Luke Mulks, VP of Business Operations at Brave Software, took to X (formerly Twitter) to share that it was not the case.
He started by showing off the most recent PrivacyTests stats, where Firefox performed worse than Brave on the privacy front. This was in response to the claim that “Firefox's privacy settings are strong and easy to use.”
He then moved on to Firefox's claim that Brave's default ad-blocker may break websites and that you have to “keep fiddling with it”. Luke added that their ad blocking is being continuously improved, and can be toggled off per site.
The post in question.
Similarly, the statement about Brave defaulting to their search engine and users needing to go into the browser settings also caught flak.
Luke pointed out that Mozilla itself takes money from Google for keeping it as the default search engine on Firefox, and that this behavior with Brave Search was a feature, not a bug.
He also further clarified that there is a dedicated “Find elsewhere” button on Brave, which allows users to use Google, Bing, and Mojeek to search for things.
Closing out his arguments against Firefox, Luke noted that even though Brave is a Chromium-based web browser, their team ensures to “harden the hell out of it”.
He said that open source software like Chromium is beautiful in a way that it allows building applications on user-first principles, allowing developers to “correct user-hostile business ethics corruption at scale”.
💬 What are your views on this? Should Firefox up their game instead of doing just PR?
Here's why you should opt for It's FOSS Plus Membership:
- Even the biggest players in the Linux world don't care about desktop Linux users. We do. - We don't put informational content behind paywall. Your support keeps it open for everyone. Think of it like 'pay it forward'. - Don't like ads? With the Plus membership, you get an ad-free reading experience. - When millions of AI-generated content is being published daily, you read and learn from real human Linux users. - It costs just $2 a month, less than the cost of your favorite burger.
Become a Plus Member today and join over 300 people in supporting our work.
Maybe it's the queers, who ousted Brendan Eich and took over Mozilla, after failing to keep FireFox widely usable browser are now trying to stand out by picking on him again?
I have both, Brave is my default; but occasionally I use Firefox, it seems that Brave is possibly too secure to function with some sites. When this happens I try to use Firefox on an old "sanitary" laptop, transferring the results locally - offline.
I've been a Brave user since it was released. I use it on Linux, Windows and android. Brave has a VPN, private tabs and and a private window with Tor. Brave is available as flatpak and snap apps on Linux if you don't want to use the terminal to install it. It is easy to install It via the terminal as all you have to do is copy and paste the terminal commands. It is also available on PI OS in the PI-APPS app. I use Edge on occasion as I find that co-pilot is better than LEO.
I've always used Firefox - I just need to make a couple of trivial changes on initial install - replace Google with DuckDuckGo as a search engine and add uBlock Origin. No reason to change, is there? I've never tried Brave.
doubt firefox will ever add ublock origin since they now own a extremely invasive ad platform when compared to braves more privacy focused option that you do not have to participate in ever. heck brave even forked ublock origin into there own version using rust which reduces risk to vulnerabilities when compared to extensions that use java.
I do consider privacy and I use Firefox, Linux and a de-googled phone. I have thought about switching to Brave. I guess I just dislike changing things because of the technical issues and the time it takes and not knowing all the ins and outs of software. I am losing my trust of most things Internet and even beyond like cell phones and digital TV. The digital domain in all its forms has become a gigantic spying operation and merciless data collection mafia. How much easier it was to remain private in the 1970's-80's and still not lack for some technology. It wasn't quite the stone age many think it was.
I used Brave for several years and I still think it has the best security (sometimes too good - one of my banking sites refuses to work unless I turn off the block cookies setting). But I recently switched to back Firefox when I realized that Brave was promoting cryptocurrency, which I consider to be a scam and a security risk. Firefox's security is just about as good as Brave's and it has not broken any websites so far in its default settings.
Giving Brave arguments a chance. "You can turn off the VPN, Crypto wallet, AI summaries" haha hard pass. Firefox sucks but it doesn't have to deal with a neutered Ublock, and no a proprietary adblocker tied to a browser is not better. You all should be fighting harder for Ublock. Firefox Foundation is rotten to the core but still better than that mess and you can and should fork
brave forked ublock into rust which should mean added security from java vulnerabilities and with braves fork of ublock and its other shields it outperforms firefox with ublock on every test i have tried. plus firefox gives me issues with some websites while brave has been flawless and its probably due to the fact that chromium is overall a better supported project with very high quality contributors.
I've never been all that concerned about privacy. Advertisers'll always find a way to track all of us, no matter which browser we use, so Internet privacy's an illusion, at best, in any case. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of us aren't all that interesting individually, but when our activities are aggregated, we, as groups, become very interesting, so, do what you will, our activities will be tracked/evaluated, whatever we do. I, for one, choose to not worry about it. I'll use the Internet as I see fit, trusting that keeping my browser and OSes up to date, coupled with good Internet behavior, will serve to protect me from most, if not all, exploits I encounter. One very important thing I always do, is never click a hyperlink before I hover over it to identify where it will take me. If I have any uncertainty about the URL, I use my browser's search function to get me where the link purports to take me. It may be a bit more bother, but it's definitely safer, if you ask me. My concept here is that security is as important, and perhaps more so, than privacy. As I said earlier, individually, I'm not all that interesting.
i agree about keeping stuff up to date, that is basically one of the most important thing you can do to protect yourself. i also agree with you on url's. my company teaches us not to trust emails or links and so forth and what to look for and we also report anything we consider suspicious. heck i never trust email or random sms messages. Every year email seems to trick a lot of people into doing something stupid at many companies. A little bit of common sense is needed to protect yourself from all the malicious things that people try to do to others.
i use brave browser and have used it for a long time. i use to have issues with bot check on brave search which made me switch to duckduckgo search with brave browser a while ago. i recently tried brave search again and was liking it over the last month with its simple privacy ai summary at top and then today i got the annoying bot checks again not letting me move forward on android so i switched back to duckduckgo which has no bot checks. i really wish brave would do away the bot checks since it could be causing people to not use there search. i will still use there browser but i'm not going to use a search that annoys me with bot checks that i can not seem to bypass on android. I am not having the issue currently on ubuntu only android and its extremely annoying and switching search providers is only way to fix it.
Brave + Ublock + 1Password is the perfect combination for privacy. I'll never trust my passwords to a browser. Also, Brave's "Answer with AI" search feature is excellent and I've found the search engine superior to Google in almost all cases, except when I search for some specific person's social media using the name or nickname
No. Brave + AdGuard + Bitwarden is the perfect combination for privacy. That's the perfect combo. AdGuard works best in almost every browser and software. Yes, you read it right. It can block almost everything within operating system.
Generally Brave seems more full featured and Firefox seems to be a bit snappier. I really like Brave Search and its built in AI summarization as well. I use both to be honest. And most VMs default to Firefox which is already installed so there is that.
Once Linux distros ditch Firefox as the default browser, Firefox is dead.
For anyone thinking about jumping ship, you can easily disable all the crypto wallet and Web3 features by searching for them in "brave://flags". Granted they shouldn't be enabled in the first place, but it's easy to toggle off at least.
As for ad blocking, uBlock MV2 will supported long term and can be found in Brave's settings. I'd recommend leaving Brave shields enabled with strict blocking, but deselect any block lists to avoid conflicts with uBlock's own.
zero issues with selecting all block list and using strict settings at same time. you can deselect any social block list if you use that stuff. major distros will not be ditching firefox anytime soon even though i wish they would but firefox has been earning a ton of money lately no idea what they do with it since a browser should never cost that much to make in my opinion. Firefox's biggest threat to the largest share of its revenue currently is the government and what it ultimately decides to do about google being a monopoly and if google will be required to stop paying firefox and others. Firefox would still be bringing in millions without google but it would be significantly a lot less then it currently brings in and i'm guessing that would not be enough due to some very high salaries and waste so hopefully they could either restructure or let someone else take them over if government takes away googles money from them. Brave does not need googles money.
You said to deselect any block list to avoid conflicts with ublocks own????? you make no sense. ublock origin is built directly into brave and there is no reason people must undo the defaults and it is ok to select more block list if needed. you also said you can disable items with brave://flags when there is no reason for most people to be messing with that when they can just toggle all that stuff on and off in settings which is safer and easier for people who may not understand all the flags.
Brave Shields and uBlock operate independently - the two don't work together as such, which can cause conflicts. It's a lot safer to let Brave block trackers etc. that can't be blocked by the Chromium version of uBlock, and let uBlock handle everything else.
In 2022, 81% of Mozilla’s revenues were derived from Google, amounting to $510 million. Mozilla subscription and advertising revenues where $75 million in 2022
The search deal was renewed for another three years in 2022, with Mozilla expected to generate over $400 million annually from Google.
It's Mozilla's releases that are bad and come with user-hostile defaults in need of constant tweaking. Distros should stop shipping mozilla's builds and default to a derivative like floorp or librewolf (this one's difficult since its defaults are actually overreaching).
i agree on user hostile defaults and also agree that distros should switch since the defaults are not opt in and before you can even change them your data is being sent out to things you never wanted to allow like auto opt in to be part of any studies that mozilla is conducting which also allows mozilla to install any software that is needed for the study directly into the browser without informing you when this happens or what is being installed and without letting you know what it is even for. They even did a auto opt in with a update not that long ago which goes against what most distros should even be in favor of. i will never touch the official firefox version again and now rely on librewolf when i want to use a firefox based browser.
There is no easy way to import or export my passwords from firefox to Brave if you aren't a tech person. Brave's import feature says passwords but it doesn't move the passwords.
It is sort of nuts to use a browser to manage passwords. They aren't specialized or hardened for the task. Your passwords are not available except in the browser. And a password manager provides additional per site functionality like TOTP and notes that a browser password manager does not.
I believe Brave is superior to Firefox for several reasons. Firstly, Brave is based on Chromium, which ensures compatibility with a wider range of websites. In contrast, I've encountered issues with some sites while using Firefox. Additionally, Brave's built-in ad blocker effectively blocks ads on YouTube without the need for the uBlock Origin extension. This is significant, especially since uBlock Origin has recently been blocked from downloading on Chrome. Even Microsoft Edge outperforms Firefox in many aspects. For Firefox to regain its competitive edge, I think it needs to address some of the website loading issues it currently faces.
content filtering in brave "settings,shields,content filtering" is a forked version of ublock origin built directly into brave and i agree with everything you are saying.
This is like kids in the playground, the actual truth about this argument is somewhere in between what they are both saying. Personally I have both Brave and Firefox on my Linux Mint system & I regularly take take other browsers for a test drive simply because no developers are ever perfect & usually the best way is using whichever one suits your purpose for a particular task.
brave is miles ahead of firefox when it comes to privacy and everything else for that matter heck a forked version of ublock origin is built into brave. nothing breaks on brave like they say and firefox was recently up to more shenanigans regarding data collection with a update. i also prefer librewolf over firefox since its less work to setup the way i want it. brave does not need googles money to survive like firefox does and i am starting to like brave search more lately since it does not have a partnership with Microsoft like duckduckgo.
You have no idea what you are talking about. First of all there is no fork of ublock built in brave. brave shields is less powerful than ublock, it doesn't support $popup and they leach ublock filters. It also whitellists ads from brave inc ad platform. ublock is more powerful than anything and the full power of it is unleased in firefox based browsers only. For more information https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox
Brave, a privacy-focused web browser, forked the popular adblocker uBlock Origin and rewrote its core engine in Rust, resulting in adblock-rust. This decision allowed Brave to create a native, open-source adblocker engine, decoupled from the browser’s JavaScript-based extensions ecosystem. Key Features uBlock Origin compatibility: ablock-rust maintains compatibility with uBlock Origin’s resource formats, enabling the use of existing filters and rules. Scriptlet injection and redirect rules: ablock-rust supports scriptlet injection and redirect rules, similar to uBlock Origin. Content-blocking feature: enables conversion of standard ABP-style rules into Apple’s content-blocking format, supporting export for iOS and macOS platforms. Resource-assembler feature: parses resources directly from file formats used by the uBlock Origin repository. Benefits Native integration: ablock-rust is a native Rust-based engine, allowing for tighter integration with the Brave browser and improved performance. Open-source: the rewritten engine is open-source, enabling community contributions and transparency. Decoupling from JavaScript: Brave’s adblocker is no longer reliant on browser extensions, reducing potential security risks and improving overall browser stability. Conclusion Brave’s decision to fork uBlock Origin and rewrite its engine in Rust has resulted in a powerful, native adblocker engine, ablock-rust. This move enables Brave to maintain control over its adblocking capabilities, improve performance, and provide a more secure and transparent experience for users.
the ads you say it whitelist can be disabled and there is a fork of ublock origin in brave even though it's not completely the same but it is more then capable of blocking just as much as the original. when combined with the other shield settings it outperforms ublock origin on firefox. the youtube ad blocking in brave is from the ublock they forked. how do you leach filter list that are not maintained by ublock origin? i guess ublock origin is leaching them also based on what you are saying and brave having there own custom fork of ublock origin means the feature will exist in brave regardless of what google does with extensions in the future.
i have all the crypto stuff disabled and wallet removed so maybe that's why i never see any of it. I'm glad brave never needed to rely on google funding them to survive like firefox. no idea what will happen to firefox if government forces google to stop giving them money since google is considered a monopoly for paying everyone even apple to be default search. i'm glad brave is able to fund itself instead of relying on others like firefox.
i use chrome and edge browser on linux, however brave is like more brave browser than firefox, firefox was my default browser but now i am using chrome because firefox is another chrome.
brave has been slandering firefox for a long time. privacytests org is also run by their employees. finally firefox is waking up and respond to their nonsense.
firefox is garbage and similar to beta software that still contains bugs. i keep having issues on various websites with video playback or not being able to click on something and when i open those same websites in brave i have zero issues. The ceo of firefox needs to be replaced.
i use both brave and librewolf. i like librewolf better the firefox since it disables firefox spyware for me without me having to check settings to see if they added any new spyware that like they did not that long ago without no prompt which angered me. Bascially when i installed firefox i disabled data collection in settings and then without even telling me they added a new data collection thing that needed unchecked. its to much work to keep track of what there adding so i switched to librewolf flatpak which has official support.
Most of the time only use one. The only situation where I decide to differ is when LibreWolf breaks a website than I unfilter things and or unblock JavaScript on uBlock, if that doesn't fix the issues than I open firefox or unoogled Chromium. I could use a different profile with stock settings before having to resort to use a different browser.
Ankush Das
Ran into some small problems so looked for an alternative.
I like Floorp and especially Zen, both allow me to set Freespoke as my default search engine.
Not sure I could go back to a browser that doesn't have workspaces.
When this happens I try to use Firefox on an old "sanitary" laptop, transferring the results locally - offline.
I use Edge on occasion as I find that co-pilot is better than LEO.
I've never tried Brave.
Ernie
Also ublock works best in Firefox. This is what the developer of Firefox suggests to use.
For more information
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox
For anyone thinking about jumping ship, you can easily disable all the crypto wallet and Web3 features by searching for them in "brave://flags". Granted they shouldn't be enabled in the first place, but it's easy to toggle off at least.
As for ad blocking, uBlock MV2 will supported long term and can be found in Brave's settings. I'd recommend leaving Brave shields enabled with strict blocking, but deselect any block lists to avoid conflicts with uBlock's own.
Stop lying obama.
You said to deselect any block list to avoid conflicts with ublocks own????? you make no sense. ublock origin is built directly into brave and there is no reason people must undo the defaults and it is ok to select more block list if needed. you also said you can disable items with brave://flags when there is no reason for most people to be messing with that when they can just toggle all that stuff on and off in settings which is safer and easier for people who may not understand all the flags.
Also the recent ruling against Google Search default will have a massive impact on Mozilla https://fortune.com/2024/08/05/mozilla-firefox-biggest-potential-loser-google-antitrust-search-ruling/
The search deal was renewed for another three years in 2022, with Mozilla expected to generate over $400 million annually from Google.
Opera was purchased for $600 million in 2016.
It's Mozilla's releases that are bad and come with user-hostile defaults in need of constant tweaking. Distros should stop shipping mozilla's builds and default to a derivative like floorp or librewolf (this one's difficult since its defaults are actually overreaching).
First of all there is no fork of ublock built in brave.
brave shields is less powerful than ublock, it doesn't support $popup and they leach ublock filters.
It also whitellists ads from brave inc ad platform.
ublock is more powerful than anything and the full power of it is unleased in firefox based browsers only.
For more information
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox
Key Features
uBlock Origin compatibility: ablock-rust maintains compatibility with uBlock Origin’s resource formats, enabling the use of existing filters and rules.
Scriptlet injection and redirect rules: ablock-rust supports scriptlet injection and redirect rules, similar to uBlock Origin.
Content-blocking feature: enables conversion of standard ABP-style rules into Apple’s content-blocking format, supporting export for iOS and macOS platforms.
Resource-assembler feature: parses resources directly from file formats used by the uBlock Origin repository.
Benefits
Native integration: ablock-rust is a native Rust-based engine, allowing for tighter integration with the Brave browser and improved performance.
Open-source: the rewritten engine is open-source, enabling community contributions and transparency.
Decoupling from JavaScript: Brave’s adblocker is no longer reliant on browser extensions, reducing potential security risks and improving overall browser stability.
Conclusion
Brave’s decision to fork uBlock Origin and rewrite its engine in Rust has resulted in a powerful, native adblocker engine, ablock-rust. This move enables Brave to maintain control over its adblocking capabilities, improve performance, and provide a more secure and transparent experience for users.
that's why mozilla bought an ad platform. like the one brave has.
privacytests org is also run by their employees.
finally firefox is waking up and respond to their nonsense.