Firefox is trying to gain back user trust with this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=O-xyNkvIB9g
This is a legit question: Should anybody trust Firefox again unless they put “we won’t sell your data” back into the privacy policy? I’m actually not sure if they haven’t already done so, let me elaborate:
https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Brave: “We do not sell, trade, or transfer your information to any third parties.” This seems to obviously be in the legally binding text part. As is this one: “It’s Brave’s policy to not collect personal data1 unless it’s necessary to provide services to our users, or to meet certain legal obligations. We do not buy or sell personal data about consumers.” (Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer.)
However, for Firefox it seems ambiguous to me, which worries me: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/#notice There is no appearance of “sell” in the entire privacy document, excpet for the top summary where i’m not sure if it’s at all legally non-binding.
Does anybody know if it is legally binding? If Mozilla were serious about it, why would they leave it ambiguous whether it is…?
Based on that, I’m not sure if Mozilla’s video about getting users back is worth trusting. I wonder if it’s just me.
Update for clarification: I’m not using Brave myself, and this isn’t a suggestion anybody should blindly do so.
You had me until you propped up brave as the good guy. I would sooner trust opera than brave. They’ve already been caught being sheisters with your data.
See here.
Very funny to mention Brave like it’s a normal browser.
Why wait for that to start distrusting FF https://lemmy.ml/c/librewolf
OP works for Brave. Original post is just an ad.
I use Librewolf myself, but I’m concerned about upstream Firefox dying so this whole situation frustrates me. The only reason I mention Brave is because Brave is also a company (unlike Librewolf) and has a Terms of use to compare Mozilla to (unlike Librewolf).
I just know from a privacy standpoint that I always understood Brave to be a hardcore no even dating back to 2018.
That could be true, I honestly don’t know. The crypto stuff in Brave definitely seems weird.
Could you link where they say that?
Regardless, they are afflicted by Lawyer Brain and need to hike it to BlueSky
Yeah I always love seeing Brave being mentioned as the better alternative to any browser.
Marketing works…
Reality does too.
Debatable
Use a Firefox fork that respects you
That’ll eventually die the same way Firefox does because forks only survive by way of subsidized capabilities off of the work of the Firefox engineering team.
There is no winning here.
i’m going to be one of the last holdouts; refusing to switch to a chromium based browser. lol
My personal hope is if Firefox ever dies that the LibreWolf team will just use Chromium as a base instead. I’ll go wherever the LibreWolf team does.
Can you suggest one? Obvious it’s not LibreWolf due to lack of respect.
What’s wrong with LW?
They broke saving passwords workflow and disabled that popup to do it.
You can turn it on in settings. I use it and it works fine.
Which version do you use?
I use the latest version. I also have resist fingerprinting disabled and sync enabled. It’s been a while so I don’t quite remember but I think one or both of those might be required for it to work. I know resist fingerprinting disables a lot of stuff so for convenience I disable it and instead use a JS blocker.
Unfortunately, you’re statement from before is wrong. Saving passwords is still broken. I just double-checked it Librewolf on the latest 148.0.2.2 version. By saving password I mean the “Ask to save passwords” in Private & Security settings. Librewolf completely ignores it. Librewolf folks do some very stupid UI things with their fork.
Don’t trust them. Trust open-source.
Use forks, and donate to known projects that exist for (at least) a few years.
Shit post
Frustration post
Buying the company usually means buying all of their user information as well. Other companies can change their policies too. I think you should judge them by their actions, and give them a chance to answer your questions before you condemn them.
(Did you try asking them about your concerns?)
Since there are alternatives, I don’t find that argument too compelling. I’m hoping people will continue to speak up about this though. Ideally I would want Mozilla to do better with their policy, assuming they actually act nice and just aren’t very good at making their policy sound like it.
Dunno. Ive already left. Now its on them to give me a good enough reason to consider going back.
To where?
Waterfox, brave, many options.
Brave is shit I don’t know why people keep recommending it.
Ok
Lynx doesn’t sell you’re data, sue it
Maybe mozilla is just more honest than crypto and affiliate scammers? They all sell your data , just have to try and give as possible to them.
FWIW I don’t recommend starting a post about selling data where the very first link points to a Google product.
Consider next time not linking to YouTube but instead the blog post that linked to it and ideally an alternative more privacy conscious frontend, e.g. invidious.
It seems like the official original source for this video is Youtube.
Have you tried waterfox?
Owned by an advertising companyNot true anymore, my badNo, that has changed since almost 3 years.
Source: https://www.waterfox.com/blog/a-new-chapter-for-waterfox/
Please verify before you accidentally spread misinformation.
I was not aware this, will edit the comment. Thank you!
I think when they defended the removal they said they changed it because the definition of “sell” was quite broad in some jurisdictions
https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Brave: “We do not sell, trade, or transfer your information to any third parties.” This is obviously in the legally binding text part.
This is only for data that the user transmits to them in conjunction with feedback.
Here’s another quote: “It’s Brave’s policy to not collect personal data1 unless it’s necessary to provide services to our users, or to meet certain legal obligations. We do not buy or sell personal data about consumers.” That one isn’t in the feedback section.
deleted by creator
The reasoning for Firefox changing their policy is that legally, in some jurisdictions, a sale of data is very ambiguous.
They are sending a “count of active users” to advertisers, which their legal team thinks counts as a sale of private data.
Is this good enough a reason? Up to you really. Their policy is fairly wide open for further actual data sales now, it certainly gives me an itchy feeling.
Maybe I’m just an old, cynical man (I’m 44) but it’s not like their policy forces them to follow it, I mean why trust that “they promised they won’t do it in their policy” means they won’t just do it anyway without telling anyone?
I think it’s mostly a defence against getting sued if they got caught. Chrome can point at their policy and get the case dismissed, Firefox would have to defend it in court and risk losing.
But you are absolutely correct, privacy policy’s are only as binding as your ability to enforce them, and you and I don’t really have any means to enforce them against a large Corp.
So why can Brave still have that clause? That’s what I don’t get. I also feel like Mozilla could try to do something like “we don’t ever sell your data, except this one corner case” and just explain it, but it seems like they didn’t even bother. (I could be completely misunderstanding things and perhaps I’m being unfair here. It’s just how it comes across to me as an uninformed doofus.)
You’d have to ask Braves lawyers. It could just be that Mozilla is more risk averse, perhaps brave thinks they won’t be sued.
It would be nice if they were clearer, but I think they don’t want to (or legally cant) define exactly what they do.
