Just read this >>>https://www.pcgamer.com/firefox-has-lost-46m-users-over-the-last-three-years/
I am really worried and frustrated. I have invested time & energy into Firefox to make it more private. I am talking about implementing the arkenfox custom user.js & using Dns over Https. “If” Firefox dies what other alternative do I have which cant match the privacy which is offered by the Firefox/arkenfox combo ?
Is there an arkenfox equivalent available for Brave ?
I would say that Brave is not bad out of the box. The questions about Brave are more ‘baked in’ than what it exposes externally. If you run it against the ‘test’ sites, it does pretty well even about fingerprinting, especially if you stay away from full screen usage.
Of course - the only truly ‘safe’ browsing is on your own website, in your own LAN… (not too helpful, that!)
The only problem with Brave is that it doesn’t allow users to use Dns over Https under Linux. It allows Windows users to set DoH. Frankly I find this very very stupid. I am not blaming the Brave devs for this. The lack of DoH support (under Linux) belongs to the original project that is Chrome/Chromium.
I just let the VPN handle that - they have access to everything anyway, so either trust them or… What Brave does/knows is then irrelevant.
Perhaps Ungoogled-Chromium + some privacy extensions? I am not sure how well it matches up against Fire-Arken-fox but I am going to test it when I find some time. Installing extensions on UC is a little bit of a hassle but not that bad. Perhaps someone with more experience with UC will chime in to share some thoughts.
Right…It’s the only one 
Well as far as I know Brave is the Ungoogled-Chromium.
What are some of the other features of Brave that you don’t like ? That way I may know stuff about Brave that I am not aware of.
Hey, at first you’ve said problem and now features - it’s very different things you know 
But… Which privacy browser? - #473 by dalto
Meaning Brave is sketchy and not really safe.
What I meant was the only problem that I face under Brave is its lack of DoH which I guess can be called a feature. I will surely read that thread. Thanks.
I don’t really think so. It is based on Chromium and not on Ungoogled-Chromium. I mean you could still install extensions from Chrome Webs Store. I don’t know if Brave sync uses Chrome’s infrastructure or not. Perhaps more savvy people on the forum could tell if it does strip out any Google-related code or not.
I don’t believe it does.
Certainly not in the same way that ungoogled-chromium does.
After I read that Brave offers more privacy that Chromium I made the mistake of assuming that “privacy” in this case means that the Brave team has removed all the Google stuff. I mean I just cant understand how privacy & Google can coexist.
So what the Brave team has basically done is they took Chromium & added some features
Privacy
Brave blocks ads by default (unlike Chrome, which requires a 3rd-party extension such as AdBlock).
Brave blocks 3rd-party tracking by default.
On Chrome, mega-advertisers like Google and Facebook use 3rd-party cookies to track your browsing on nearly every website.
By blocking 3rd-party cookies, Brave limits the amount of data Facebook, Google, and other ad networks can collect about your browsing habits.
Brave stores all your browsing data locally on your computer, which means you can delete it at any time.
Brave supports Tor browsing, making it the first all-purpose browser to do so.
I want to know your personal opinion. Firefox with arkenfox Vs ungoogle-chromium which offers more privacy ?
Yes. That is a reasonable summary I think.
In that sense, brave is like vivaldi, sw iron, slimjet, microsoft edge or any of the other chromium-based browsers.
Since brave’s current marketing focus is on privacy, what they do offer is an out of the box experience with more privacy features enabled. That is the primary reason the browser does well in privacy tests/reviews. They are comparing the default settings in most cases. If that is your point of comparison, brave is one of the best options from a privacy standpoint. However, firefox-based browsers offer many more options to protect your privacy if you choose to enable them.
Firefox with arkenfox.
ungoogled-chromium doesn’t ensure your privacy generally, it removes all the connections to google. While, of course, this helps with privacy, it isn’t the same as ff + arkenfox.
Please read this article >>> https://www.pcgamer.com/firefox-has-lost-46m-users-over-the-last-three-years/
Do you think Firefox is dying ? With your help after implementing the arkenfox user.js I feel a bit safe now & I dont want to lose this solution.
Firefox is still has nearly 200 million users according to that data.
I think that switching browsers because you feel it my die in the future is the opposite of good plan if you want it to be maintained.
Alright. Nothing to worry about then. I will keep using Firefox/Arkenfox.
If I don’t go for the Librewolf from AUR, would you think running their appimage could be a reasonable alternative?
I think their is very little difference between using librewolf-bin from the AUR or using the appimage from the librewolf site. Either way, you are getting an official librewolf binary. It just comes down to your preferences of packaging format.
The aur package librewolf is a little different. That PKGBUILD builds the whole thing from source manually by applying all the patches which makes it quite long and complicated. While it is probably totally fine, I am not willing to do the work to go through all those patches and options and ensure they are accurate and safe.
Thanks for explaining the similarities and differences between the options available for installing Librewolf. I appreciate it.