![]() ![]() Look, e.g., at this comparison (which is maintained by Arthur Edelstein who is a Firefox and Tor Browser developer). You don't really have to use LibreWolf as you can easily get everything in Firefox as well. Needless to say that all this is also available in Firefox. It's not so good in the first category as it obviously hasn't the "AdGuard URL Tracking Protection" list enabled. Tracking query parameter tests and Tracking Content blocking: LibreWolf is good in the last category as it comes with uBlock Origin installed by default. It's the Firefox implementation of the Cross-Origin Identifier Unlinkability in the Tor Browser.ģ. If I try to get to the site via another link (Google, for instance)I get the same message. I like the Pale Moon web-browser, but it has refused to visit at least three of my regular bookmarks (Duckduckgo and Wikipedia among others). I have been trying Puppy Tahr 6.0.2 (I usually run Linux Mint). ![]() Fingerprinting Resistance Tests: LibreWolf uses Resist Fingerprinting (privacy.resistFingerprinting = true in about:config) as default which is also available in Firefox but not set as default. Pale Moon refuses to visit some web sites. This is also available in Firefox, of course, but not yet set as default (but planned - see the results for the nightly builds which match the LibreWolf results).Ģ. State Partitioning Tests: LibreWolf uses the "strict" setting in "about: preferences#privacy" by default which enables Dynamic First Party Isolation aka Total Cookie Protection. LibreWolf is better than Firefox and Brave - but why?ġ. Click to expand.You don't really have to use LibreWolf as you can easily get everything in Firefox as well.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |