• 1 Post
  • 15 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 1st, 2023

help-circle
  • installing Chromium

    This wouldn’t sit well with most privacy conscious folk out there. Though, I can understand it from a security point of view. Especially, when one notices that Chromium isn’t installed from Fedora’s repos, but instead the RPM is built to offer a more up-to-date version that should provide improved security compared to the stable version.

    removing Flatpak

    Probs for the sake of disabling unprivileged user namespaces; as you might have correctly alluded to.

    even software stores

    I imagine for the sake of minimizing attack surface.

    So how am I gonna install software now, layering?

    The Nix package manager is installable on Fedora’s atomic distros, so perhaps that route is worth exploring.

    to my knowledge flatpaks are more secure than RPMs

    To my knowledge, Flatpak’s sandbox indeed isn’t achievable by default with RPMs; unless one knows how to properly utilize SELinux to that effect.




  • Apart from having all the nice KDE integration

    I’m a sucker for GNOME :P , but I’ll keep it in mind.

    things like Keepass integration

    The flatpak does allow integration, but isn’t built-in unfortunately; so one has to fiddle a bit themselves to set it up.

    Fido2 keys

    I should rely more on those. Do you have any recommendations? I’ve been hearing good things about Nitropad and Yubico, but I honestly don’t know if they’re actually good and how they would fare amongst eachother.

    drag and drop

    Overrated anyways /s :P .

    Also afaik the Fedora Firefox has a good SELinux profile

    It’s probably better configured with the native package than the flatpak one indeed. I wonder if this will change as Fedora is interested to ship Firefox as a flatpak by default on Silverblue (and variants).

    it runs damn fast. I did a speed test and it was best

    I haven’t had the best internet speeds since I’ve been relying on free VPN. But that’s on me :P .


  • as from Firefox RPM for example I can open any file and save anywhere. But its process isolation right?

    For Firefox, the verdict on its native sandbox vs Flatpak’s native sandbox doesn’t seem conclusive. With -assumingly- knowledgeable peeps on both sides of the argument, which indeed does raise the question how knowledgeable they actually are. Nonetheless, for myself, I’ve accepted Flatpak’s sandbox to not be inferior to Firefox’ native one. Thus, I don’t see any problem with using its flatpak.





  • Officially supported doesnt mean its more stable.

    Never implied that anyways. Official merely ensures that the amount of trusted parties can be minimized.

    Bubblewrap is not insecure.

    Bubblewrap, when properly applied is indeed excellent; perhaps the best utility to sandbox applications on Linux. I’m thankful that flatpaks makes use of bubblewrap, namespaces and seccomp to offer relatively safe/secure apps/binaries, I’m unaware of any other ‘(universal) package manager’ within the Linux-space that offers similar feats in that regard. Unfortunately, Chromium-based browsers just happen to have an even stronger sandbox -if properly configured- than flatpaks are currently capable of.



  • doesn’t do anything better than Firefox or Librewolf.

    Besides the fact that some sites misbehave on Firefox(-based browsers), it does if you’re actually security sensitive; Chromium’s sandbox is simply superior to Firefox’.

    I didn’t even mention the CEO, you must have confused my reply. It’s the product being X and doing Y which I don’t like.

    It’s true that you didn’t mention anything regarding its CEO, but I assumed your comment might be related to it. It seems not to be the case; my bad for assuming and mentioning it and thank you for clearing yourself from that ‘allegation’!

    Would it be fair to assume that your primary gripe with Brave is its (at best) controversial stance regarding the ‘open’ source nature of their product?



  • Nice, their marketing works.

    You can’t deny its merits. At best you can question their integrity based on bad business-practices in the past. Their CEO being “X” and doing “Y” does not inherently make the software bad.

    If you really cared about privacy you’d probably use something like Librewolf, which is not proprietary.

    From OP: “at times I have to rely on a Chromium-based browser if a website decides to misbehave on a Firefox-based browser


  • You already use an arch container that has access to the AUR, which has literally every package, available on linux.

    Call me paranoid if you will.

    if anything, flatpaks are THE official (universal) packaging format for Linux

    I don’t deny that, I make good use of a ton of flatpaks on my system. I also believe that it’s the best we have. And I would literally switch to Brave as a flatpak if it would satisfy the following:

    • Be official and thus maintained by Brave itself.
    • Not having to forego its own more powerful sandbox due to (hopefully) current restrictions of Flatpak. Yes, you read that correctly; while flatpaks are arguably the safest way to consume most applications, this doesn’t apply to apps that actually have stronger sandboxes which had to be ‘slimmed down’ when packaged as a flatpak. Thus, currently, for maximum protection, one simply can’t rely on flatpaks for their Chromium-based browsers. If you choose to do so and it has worked out for you wonderfully; that’s awesome, I’ve been there and enjoyed the experience as well. But, I can’t justify it for myself any longer.

  • What does Brave give you what the other Chromium based browser doesn’t have?

    Brave is known to take privacy (and security) more seriously than its contenders. It’s therefore unsurprising to find it recommended by Privacy Guides. Some of its unique features related to privacy can be found here.

    Maybe you can install add-ons instead?

    Excellent extensions like uBlock Origin heavily rely on Manifest v2 in order to do their bidding. Unfortunately, Chromium intends to stop supporting it. Which will inevitably lead to many Chromium-based browsers to follow the lead and stop supporting it as well. At least Brave has confirmed multiple times to support Manifest v2 longer. Furthermore, I’m not aware of any extension that does an equally excellent job at spoofing your fingerprint randomly. Though, I’d love to be corrected on that.