I currently use a few browsers on various platforms:
- Mullvad on Linux and macOS
- Firefox (w. Arkenfox User.js) on FreeBSD
- Safari (w. extensions & privacy settings changed) on iOS
However, I am finding the absence of any sort of cookie persistence in Mullvad and Safari to be a little annoying, as just about everything I use has 2FA enabled.
So, I was wondering what you would say a good choice for a second browser would be. I would use this to access a small number of privacy-respecting sites (such as CloudTube and Lemmy), which would involve saving cookies and allowing third-party content (i.e. googlevideo in CloudTube). Ideally, this should be Firefox or WebKit-based, and I would like suggestions for Linux, macOS, FreeBSD, and iOS.
On macOS, I have not signed in with an Apple ID, so I can’t use the App Store; but I do have Homebrew and pkgsrc(7) installed.
Any ideas?
EDIT: I am NOT moving away from Mullvad. I’m looking for a COMPLEMENTARY browser which I can use for stuff like CloudTube.
Your threat model is unclear to me, so I’m a little confused as to why you don’t just use Firefox across all platforms. You could use multi-container support to stay signed in on certain things and clear cookies in others iirc.
LibreWolf or maybe ungoogled chromium …or Firefox with arkenfox’s user.js
Ungoogled chromium need to be hardened since its goal is to be a drop-in replacement of chromium without google.
Firefox on Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD should do it. Use container tabs to keep accounts separate. It’s what I use, and it works well.
If I need a Chromium-based browser because a site is broken, I use Brave as a backup because they have ad blocking that actually works. I don’t remember the last time I launched it though.
I don’t know about iOS. Everything on iOS is Safari under the hood, though if you’re in the EU, that could be changing soon. I don’t know enough to recommend any of them though.
Orion browser is good for iOS and macOS.
Was buggy as hell for me on iOS
I use Safari as my super-protected browser on MacOS and iOS, and if I have problems on a site I switch to Firefox with fewer privacy extensions. It’s a pretty good system, but I am going to look up your Arkenfox thing, as I haven’t heard of that before.
Long story short, it’s a set of scripts that make Firefox better, at the potential expense of breaking some websites.
LibreWolf comes with some of Arkenfox functionality with less pain in implementation.
your need sounds perfect for just using ungoogled chromium out of the box. make sure you turn off the switch for deleting data on exit, and you’re good to go.
I use Mullvad as my default browser (so it opens links) and Librewolf for login sessions so I can store some selected cookies and connect it up with keepassxc for some password/2fa autofill goodness.
Thorium for dire emergencies if I need a Chromium based browser for the very rare cases where Mullvad and Librewolf don’t work.
I’m confused. Are you deleting everything nonstop on Safari? Because 2fa should be persistent on default.
As for a mullvad alternative, maybe librewolf.
I’m using Librewolf. The problem is that when cookies are deleted some sites will want to text you to “authenticate” your browser again. Your name and password alone are not enough.
It gets old doing this repeatedly. And it pisses me off that they act like they are being so secure by doing this yet they use a text instead of an authenticator app.
You can set exceptions per site in LibreWolf. Would that solve your issue?
It just might. But my problem might still be that I have my entire history and cookies are deleted as they age past 28 days so anything that I only rarely return to is lost. I might have to check into exceptions.
elinksorw3mMozilla based, I use LibreWolf. Chromium based, I use Brave or Vivaldi.
Tor Browser
I use Librewolf on my laptop for most browsing, but I keep Google Chrome open just for Gmail, calendar, and drive. I know what you mean about losing the damn cookies making you suddenly have to get a text to authenticate again and that sucks.
When I come across those sites I usually just pull them up in Chrome instead since I keep it open anyway. They are typically not tracking sites anyway and I’m using an adblocking DNS.
I’m skeptical of any supposed privacy advocate that refuses to recommend Brave. It’s no Tor Browser but in my own experience and tests, it consistently wins over just about everything else outside of Tor Browser.
Anyways, it recently added a forgetful browsing feature. What I do is have that toggled on by default, turning it off on individual sites that I want to keep logged in. Ultimately, this is better for privacy AND security, since it’d limit the damage of a token stealer.
Another option might be Librewolf if you absolutely can’t handle a Chromium-based browser (I also take issue with that approach but that’s a different topic for a different day). Firefox but more private than default. Waterfox is also an okay option nowadays, since they’re now independent from the hostile takeover that they dealt with for a while.
Overall, for my own setup, I use Brave for ~70% of my browsing, with the remaining 30% split between hardened Firefox (with BetterFox) at 20%, Librewolf at 8% and Mullvad at 2%. I only use Tor Browser once in a blue moon for sensitive subjects that could financially impact me, like medical sites, insurance research and so forth.
There are a significant number of people who refuse to support Brave due to its CEOs support for anti-lgbt legislation and donations: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich
> tests
Are you talking about the man paid by Brave who chose the tests that say Brave is best? 🤔
No, I’m talking about running it through test sites. No other browser outside of the Tor Browser is able to pass fingerprinting tests as consistently as Brave, in my experience.
Covermytracks makes never Brave look better than, say Librewolf, because Brave randomizes fingerprinting info while other browsers try to thwart fingerprinting by all looking the same.
I’d argue that randomization is more effective than making everyone look the same. It’s less noticeable when the fingerprint is randomized.
You’re probably right. I’d rather do it that way too.
