[HN Gopher] Betterfox: User.js to harden Firefox and optimize pr...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Betterfox: User.js to harden Firefox and optimize privacy,
       security, and speed
        
       Author : legrande
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2023-07-18 16:24 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | getcrunk wrote:
       | Does this turn off dns leaking in ff when it doesn't find a
       | domain.
       | 
       | And does this turn off wasm or web gpu?
        
         | kevingadd wrote:
         | For turning off wasm you're probably better off with something
         | like noscript or umatrix, turning it off globally will cause
         | mysterious problems with an increasing number of websites
        
           | hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
           | This is probably what I would want - I'd prefer to know them
           | and never visit them again except for a chosen few. (Wasm has
           | many legitimate uses and I'm happy it exists but being old
           | enough to see the evolution of the web I'm 100% sure it will
           | be abused also in the ways we have no idea about yet.)
        
       | Jaxkr wrote:
       | Meanwhile I modify my Firefox to be less secure (allow unsigned
       | extensions) so I can continue using my beloved TabMixPlus. Once
       | you taste multiple rows of tabs you'll never go back.
        
       | Capricorn2481 wrote:
       | What about Arkenfox?
        
         | Liquix wrote:
         | Arkenfox can be both heavy-handed (disables search from URL
         | bar, restore tabs from previous session, etc) and hard to
         | digest (1200 lines). By comparison, Betterfox is 250 lines and
         | looks to be more "sane" out of the box.
        
           | DerekBickerton wrote:
           | > disables search from URL bar
           | 
           | Set keyword searches to true:
           | user_pref("keyword.enabled", true);
           | 
           | That way it uses your default search engine when searching
           | from the address bar.
        
       | Nezteb wrote:
       | How does this differ from LibreWolf? https://librewolf.net
        
         | ygjb wrote:
         | There is a crucial difference between a config file that
         | changes options within Firefox, and something that adds new
         | code.
         | 
         | Unless something has changed dramatically, the Firefox team
         | (and other teams) test and fuzz Firefox extensively - obviously
         | default prefs and features will get more coverage.
         | 
         | An actual fork like LibreWolf that adds or removes code and
         | ships a different build fundamentally changes how the software
         | is built and invalidates a significant portion of the security
         | work that has been done by the Firefox security team.
         | 
         | I am not arguing that Librewolf or any of the other forks of
         | Firefox[1] are necessarily worse for security, just that
         | browsers are ridiculously complex pieces of software and making
         | claims about security requires more than just gutting or adding
         | features.
         | 
         | [1] other than Palemoon, because screw those guys; when I
         | challenged them on the security program for Palemoon, their
         | loopy leader tried to harass me and other former Mozilla folks.
         | Given their propensity for instability I wouldn't trust them at
         | all.
        
           | Nezteb wrote:
           | That's a good point, thanks!
           | 
           | I should have rephrased my question to: "How do the levels of
           | privacy/security/speed differ between Firefox+Betterfox and
           | LibreWolf?"
           | 
           | I'm sure both have their tradeoffs, but I was just curious if
           | anyone has tried and extensively compared both.
        
         | tmottabr wrote:
         | libre wolf is an fork of firefox..
         | 
         | this is a set of parameters you adjust in firefox..
        
           | rovr138 wrote:
           | It's a fork of Firefox around privacy and security.
           | 
           | So, the question is about comparing the settings on both.
           | 
           | Settings for libre wolf are here,
           | https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community/settings
        
       | robin_reala wrote:
       | ...assuming you don't use assistive technology:
       | https://github.com/yokoffing/Betterfox/blob/443710b0738ebc8f...
        
         | apazzy wrote:
         | I mean yeah it says that:                   Assumptions
         | Apply preferences from the common overrides sticky if you want
         | to revert the following behavior:              - Firefox
         | Accessibility Service is disabled to improve resource
         | utilization and security. Override this if you use assistive
         | software.
        
       | rattlesnakedave wrote:
       | I'm always incredibly skeptical of any set of tweaks that is
       | supposed to take off-the-shelf software and make it more private
       | (how?) or secure (from what?). I'm sure some of these tweaks do
       | that, but can't help but think they increase your attack surface
       | over all (unless you have the time to read and think carefully
       | about each settings change- in which case, you probably could
       | have just changed the settings yourself).
        
         | lillywastaken wrote:
         | This is generally the case imo. Installing hardening
         | tweaks/extensions/... to make yourself "more secure" and "more
         | private" often just ends in increasing the viable attack
         | surface and making yourself more identifiable (because such
         | extensions/settings are very uncommon)
        
         | belinder wrote:
         | Another way to look at it is, you may not be aware of all the
         | settings out there, and a set like this will help you discover
         | them
        
         | ygjb wrote:
         | They do modify the attack surface, but since these prefs cover
         | code that ships in the release version of Firefox, they
         | _should_ be reasonably well tested.
         | 
         | Most of the preferences in this will actually reduce the
         | target-able attack surface, and disable some features that
         | could be footguns, but at the same time disable some
         | optimizations that aim to reduce cognitive load on users (which
         | in turns reduces the likelihood that mistakes will be made).
        
           | bzmrgonz wrote:
           | Additionally, do keep in mind that browser dev's, in addition
           | to their ulterior harvesting agenda, have the burden of
           | universal appeal/usability, which makes niche installs
           | impossible. If this is a NixOS-type of configure-your-own-
           | browser, I'm all for it. This is the reason why Consumer
           | wireless-Router configuration sucks, because manufacturers
           | are trying to appeal to the masses and don't want to generate
           | a call-for-support nightmare. So yeah, if we can *nixify(I'm
           | claiming coinage here) all things produced in bulk and for
           | the masses, by all means!!!
        
         | altairprime wrote:
         | For specific example, this particular one disables the
         | bookmarks toolbar, reader mode, Firefox Sync, and screen reader
         | accessibility. Opinionated does not imply "Better", even if the
         | name claims otherwise.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-18 23:01 UTC)