• priapus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I’m not sure why you linked to this irrelevant 3 week old issue while referring to something that was fixed a year ago. Referring to it as a backdoor also implies that I was malicious, when it was simply incompetence. Have there been any security issues since? (Not trying to imply that not having any would make it safe, just wondering).

    Zen is an amateur hobbyist project, expecting it to be something else is silly. It isn’t backed by a company. You take on these risks when you use a project like this. Its open source, do your research before using it for anything important. If you don’t want to take those risks, use Firefox.

    • Wildly_Utilize@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I’d like to take this opportunity to say Mullvad browser is maintained by Mullvad and Tor Project which in my eyes sets it way apart from these hobby forks (including librewolf)

      • priapus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        I agree, Mullvad is the only fork that I have confidence in the security of (ignoring Tor ofc since it’s not really for general use).

          • priapus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            It just lacks manpower unfortunately. Going with a browser that has the funding for a security team is the safer option.

            • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Librewolf is firefox with different settings how does it not already benefit from Firefox’s security team

              • priapus@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                It does, but less than Firefox does. Their lack of manpower means delayed updates to fix zero days compared to Firefox. It also means less eyes on any patches introduced, so I’d be more concerned about malicious code being introduced.

                • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Their lack of manpower means delayed updates to fix zero days compared to Firefox

                  From their site:

                  LibreWolf is always built from the latest Firefox stable source, for up-to-date security and features along with stability.

                  As soon as firefox pushes a release, for instance to fix a security vulnerability, librewolf can immediately rebuild It is literally just firefox with different setting. Delay between firefox release and librewolf release should be negligible. You can verify this by noting that 136.0 was offered on the same day.

                  https://codeberg.org/librewolf/source/commit/2b90daeb5aa5a80443f4f7655393f610fb16418a

                  https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/136.0/releasenotes/

                  The difference in time between firefox and librewolf security updates is less than the variance between users updating their machines.

    • priapus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Also want to add that this was caused by a configuration issue. If you want security, don’t use Firefox (or its forks) default configs, look into Betterfox. Apparently Zen also uses this as the base for its default preferences, which is a good decision.