I feel like there is no web browser with a sane default configuration that I can recommend to other people. All browsers are preconfigured in a way that harms the privacy of their users or include services that no one wants such as Pocket and BAT.

Here are my problems with some popular browsers.

  • Mozilla Firefox: Pocket integration, no ad-blocking without extensions.

  • Brave: Everything related to crypto. Also its start page is horrible.

  • Chromium: No ad-blocking without extensions and soon Manifest v3 will cripple all content blockers.

Now, these suboptimal defaults wouldn’t be such a big problem if the configuration files were easy to backup and restore and respected the XDG base directory specification.

  • Lucia [she/her]@eviltoast.orgEnglish
    51·
    1 year ago

    Yep, also they don’t integrate Pocket in the browser, they just have a built-in email client, note-taking software, RSS reader, calendar bloat. Also, Vivaldi is based on chromium (as such subsribed to all Google’s bullshit), and uses Chrome extension store.

    Honestly, OP, just stick to Librewolf, it’s privacy-respecting and actually open-source, pocket’s disabled, UBo’s preinstalled.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      41·
      1 year ago

      they just have a built-in email client, note-taking software, RSS reader, calendar bloat

      You literally get a button when you first install it asking whether you want these things. One click and they’re disabled. Also OP post is about privacy not bloat and these features will only improve your privacy over using some webmail.

      Also, Vivaldi is based on chromium (as such subsribed to all Google’s bullshit)

      All google stuff is either removed or toggleable from settings.

      uses Chrome extension store.

      What’s wrong with that? It’s a good deal larger than mozilla’s

      • Lucia [she/her]@eviltoast.orgEnglish
        3·
        1 year ago

        Also OP post is about privacy not bloat

        OP is concerned about Pocket integration too, so I assumed they may not like it.

        these features will only improve your privacy over using some webmail.

        Does their built-in mail support any good encryption? The last time I used Vivaldi a mail feature wasn’t really that private. Also, using dedicated email client like claws or mutt is even better from privacy perspective.

        All google stuff is either removed or toggleable from settings.

        They can’t remove Manifest V3 though.

        What’s wrong with that? It’s a good deal larger than mozilla’s

        Yes, and it’s under Google’s control. And, again when I used it last time, you need to enable some google stuff to install extensions from the store.

        • morrowind@lemmy.ml
          1·
          1 year ago

          Not sure about the encryption tbh. I’ve never used any mail service that properly supported it so haven’t tried.

          Also, using dedicated email client like claws or mutt is even better from privacy perspective.

          Any reason why, aside from encryption?

          They can’t remove Manifest V3 though.

          That’s why they have a built in adblocker.

          • Lucia [she/her]@eviltoast.orgEnglish
            21·
            1 year ago

            Basically, you don’t want everything be dependant on a central authority - this is a single point of failure. If there’s a big security vulnerability in your web browser, but you use a standalone mail client, your mails are most probably safe.

            This also adds up to built-in adblocker - who knows if Vivaldi devs will ever go evil and sneak in exceptions in their adblocker? Or if they will sell their web browser, just like their CEO done so with his previous browser, Opera.