OR WATERFOX BROWSER FOR WEB SECURITY
see a lot of discussion on here about Brave and Waterfox, mainly folks
pushing others to use one or the other. Brave never really worked for me
in a way that made me want to keep using it until they moved to a Chromium
base recently. Figured I would throw up my own observations about each in
case anyone was interested in an unbiased look.
for those with short attention spans: Use either or both since you get
Firefox and Chrome without the garbage built into each.
front, I will say that I am a pretty basic user who cares about privacy
and security more than most but not as much as some of you. As far as
add-ons/extension I generally I use uBlock Origin, HTTPS Everywhere,
WebRTC disabler, Decentralize, Close Tab Button, a Video Download Helper,
Floccus,and a few other things. I host my own NextCloud that holds storage
for my bookmarks so I don't sign in to any browser.
requires all of those add-ons. Brave doesn't since HTTPS Everywhere,
WebRTC disabling, and ad blocking are included. But I really do not like
Brave's built-in ad blocking. It allows too much through still and I feel
it is probably due to the Brave Rewards stuff. Luckily you can disable
just the ad block part and install uBlock Origin. I am sure I could
probably get the built in to work like uBlock Origin works for me but I
already know uBlock Origin and how to make it work the way I like so I go
with what I know. Brave does reportedly have some leaking of WebRTC still
on at least some OS (developer confirmed that but i have seen no update if
it is fixed) so if you are a little more paranoid you can install a WebRTC
blocker there also just to be safe.
personal add-ons that I like to use (things like Imagus, etc) work on both
perfectly fine so there is nothing big to report there. You will find that
Brave blocks autoplay by default, so Imagus will not play gif or video on
pages that you have not explicitly enabled autoplay for a site.
also found that the autoplay block caused issues with some sites even
after you clicked on a video. This was prevalent on sites like Twitter
where a video is embedded in something that pops up when you click it. It
was not all of the time though and you can always either allow autoplay on
that site or open those up in another browser if it is a problem for you.
I usually found that I didn't care enough to open it elsewhere and just
did not watch whatever it was at all.
is much faster at HTML5 than Waterfox, although Waterfox seems to be
mostly faster overall. I ran some testing on this at test sites and found
the numbers I was getting back showed exactly what I thought I was
feeling. Always nice to know that you can back up what you feel.
do have a few sites that work with each of them in different ways. For
example, a couple of sites with embedded videos will not work right
without AutoPlay enabled in Brave (similar to the Twitter thing above).
That is the way those sites are set up (using static images as links to
videos for example) and Brave is working as designed there. Not going to
hold that against them, I can use another browser if I want to visit them.
Waterfox has a few sites that it just doesn't render properly. They work
fine in Brave. So I use both and sync bookmarks between them using
in all, Waterfox is still my main browser, but Brave stays installed and
right next to it on my taskbar because I want both. A Firefox derivative
like Waterfox is great for some sites while others work great in a
Chromium derivative like Brave. The only reasons to use a Name Brand
browser today are complete lack of technical knowledge (ex: can't use
LibreOffice because it looks too different) or a site just flat will not
work with anything else (ex: corporate and school sites are notorious for
crap like this).
One more thing I noticed. By default it seems Waterfox opens a new tab and
focuses on it when you middle click. Brave seems to open it in the
background. I prefer Brave in that sense.