Replacing Firefox to improve user privacy...

grahamperrin

vimanuelt the order is misleading. Some of the feedback came after the decision was made.

Why did you omit Telegram? If I recall correctly, my near-final words there, before pleading for public discussion, were:

… instant turn-off.

– in response to misleading, anti-Mozilla propaganda.

grahamperrin

grahamperrin lack of transparency.

grahamperrin Why did you omit Telegram?

vimanuelt … faster interaction. …

Faster is not necessarily better.

ericbsd … It is not private.

Neither is it transparent.

Non-public use of Telegram is opaque.

If it's not already clear: I quit the app after writing about the instant turn-off; I have not returned.

vimanuelt

I see. Administrative discussions are typically posted at https://t.me/ghostbsd_dev, which serves as the primary communication channel for GhostBSD contributors. Most changes are discussed there, as it allows for faster interaction.

However, it would be helpful if the forum could also reflect those conversations, to reduce the risk of misunderstandings. Relying on multiple communication platforms can lead to confusion. I had previously proposed a more unified communication model to minimize such issues.

https://forums.ghostbsd.org/d/344-proposal-for-a-consolidated-support-and-documentation-model/6

grahamperrin

I'm more than aware of the proposal, from spillage into various topics.

grahamperrin

vimanuelt … The GhostBSD project continues to prioritize simplicity, …

What's at the home page is no longer entirely believable.

Where, previously, it was quite commonplace to find people elsewhere recommending both GhostBSD and NomadBSD (typically one first, then the other):

I leaned towards GhostBSD, despite its weaknesses in some areas.

(Let's not discuss those areas here.)

On topic: the decision to replace Firefox with ungoogled-chromium has made it more difficult to be an advocate for GhostBSD.

It pains me to share that thought, but the damage is done.

vimanuelt

grahamperrin
No. The damage has not already been done. That said, it is always good to receive feedback. The goal is not to assign blame, but rather to identify the issue and the right people who can assist in resolving the issue. Clarifying responsibility can be helpful when seeking an effective solution.

vimanuelt

grahamperrin
It seems there may be some confusion about what is being compared. On the home page, I believe GhostBSD is being compared primarily with other BSD variants. In my view, it is indeed easier to install than any of the other BSD systems.

If you are looking for a straightforward way to install a desktop-ready BSD system, GhostBSD is an excellent choice.

To help keep this thread focused, I have created a separate topic for the related aside:
https://forums.ghostbsd.org/d/391-do-you-find-anything-on-the-ghostbsd-website-as-potentially-misleading

Feel free to continue that part of the discussion there.

ericbsd

grahamperrin the change is not even done in the code yet.

Giskard

I tried both LibreWolf and Ungloogled Chromium. From a user perspective, UG requires a lot more effort to be ready to browse the web. It starts without a default search engine and without an addon store ready.
On the other hand, Librewolf is ready to be uses from the start and it just needs to uncheck a couple of boxes in the settings if you have troubles with some sites or want it to expose your dark/light theme preference.
If the aim is to provide a privacy focused browser as default, I would choose LibreWolf because it allows a user to just start browsing without any intervention. (BTW, I'm writing this comment and browsing the forum while trying LW without any modification except enabling firefox sync)

vimanuelt

Giskard
While LibreWolf is compiled to disable telemetry, the presence of Normandy or its related preferences in about:config can be concerning, especially because Normandy is Firefox’s remote configuration and experiment framework. It allows Mozilla to push configuration changes, install extensions, and alter browser behavior remotely via "Shield Studies" or "Preference Rollouts".

vimanuelt

When using Ungoogled-Chromium, users must manually configure their preferred search engine, as no default is provided. I understand how that could be inconvenient. Is privacy worth the inconvenience?

Giskard

vimanuelt my main concern with UG mainly for the add-on store. I'm used to install ublock origin, cookie autodelete, privacy badger, proton pass. With LW I can do it immediately, doing the same things that I'm used to do with Firefox, while with UG I have to follow instructions to be able to do that. Also, in chromium based browsers, now is no more possible so use the plain ublock due to the new manifest for addons: I have to use the light version or AdGuard, which are far more powerful.

I think that UG as default, would be a hard choice for a common user. Firefox is still the most easy to use from scratch and I place LW in between.

vimanuelt

Giskard
I understand. The key point is that the discussion is not about which browser you personally prefer, but rather which should be set as the default. These are two separate matters. We have already examined the available browsers and considered their respective strengths and weaknesses. At present, Ungoogled-Chromium and LibreWolf remain the leading candidates. This debate arose a few years ago as well, but browsers evolve over time, and it would be reasonable to reassess our choice in light of those changes.

That said, I do not believe it would be appropriate to override Eric’s decision. However, if he is open to the idea, we could suggest holding a poll to give the community an opportunity to provide input. It is worth remembering that Eric is the project owner, and ultimately, all decisions rest with him. What we offer are simply recommendations. :-)

Giskard

vimanuelt a reconfigured UG could be a good choice, as @Robin said. What I wrote in the comment was not to promote my preference (which would be waterfox 😉 ), but my experience while trying to use both LW and UG while thinking about what it would be like if I were a novice.

Robin

Is it possible to re-mix ungoogled-chromium so that it includes all that "grandmother-friendly" stuff from the start? I added my own (Startpage search engine, cutomized this'n'that, added a /hosts file) and thought it was simple and quick. But if you're really looking to make GhostBSD "friendly" enough for a total computer novice, and you really don't want to use Firefox (and believe me, I completely understand why), then offer a customized default browser. Lots of OSes offer a cutomized, preconfigued desktop environment aimed at simplicity and "grandmother-friendliness" - perhaps the same can be done for ungoogled-chromium in GhostBSD.

vimanuelt

Robin
Yes, that is a good suggestion. Nice lateral thinking. :-) It is possible. Here is an proof of concept script. However, it would need to be refactored into a python script and introduced into gbi. When you enter your user name, it could use that variable to setup the browser setting towards the end of the install.

#!/bin/sh
# Seed Chromium user profile for ungoogled-chromium on GhostBSD
# Sets a custom search engine as the default for new users
# Author: Vester Thacker

set -eu

# Variables
SOURCE_USER="vester"  # Change this to the user you staged the profile with
PROFILE_PATH="/home/${SOURCE_USER}/.config/chromium/Default"
SKELETON_PATH="/usr/share/skel/.config/chromium/Default"

# Check if source profile exists
if [ ! -d "$PROFILE_PATH" ]; then
  echo "Error: Profile directory not found at ${PROFILE_PATH}"
  exit 1
fi

# Create skeleton directory
echo "Creating skeleton path: ${SKELETON_PATH}"
mkdir -p "${SKELETON_PATH}"

# Copy relevant files
echo "Copying Preferences and Web Data..."
cp "${PROFILE_PATH}/Preferences" "${SKELETON_PATH}/"
cp "${PROFILE_PATH}/Web Data" "${SKELETON_PATH}/"

# Optional: copy 'Local State' for broader settings
LOCAL_STATE_SRC="/home/${SOURCE_USER}/.config/chromium/Local State"
LOCAL_STATE_DEST="/usr/share/skel/.config/chromium/Local State"
if [ -f "${LOCAL_STATE_SRC}" ]; then
  echo "Copying Local State..."
  mkdir -p "$(dirname "${LOCAL_STATE_DEST}")"
  cp "${LOCAL_STATE_SRC}" "${LOCAL_STATE_DEST}"
fi

# Set safe permissions
echo "Setting permissions..."
chmod -R 755 /usr/share/skel/.config/chromium
chown -R root:wheel /usr/share/skel/.config/chromium

echo "Done. New users will now have a preconfigured search engine in ungoogled-chromium."

Thank you for the suggestion.

vimanuelt

Giskard
I see. Thank you. I misinterpreted the meaning. Thank you for the correction. :-)

ericbsd

Giskard before shipping UG or other solution, we will ensure it is still easy to use. I have not tried UG Chromium and Waterfox yet.

grahamperrin

ericbsd thanks, I understand that it's not in code.

vimanuelt Eric approved the move from firefox to ungoogle-chromium as the default browser. …

That seems decisive. I gained the impression that you had approved ungoogled-chromium as the replacement for Firefox.

ericbsd … I have not tried UG Chromium …

Was the move, to something that you have not tried, approved by you, or not?

vimanuelt

ericbsd
Yes, it is necessary to launch the browser once and manually set the preferred search engine. This action creates the relevant configuration file. Once that file has been generated, we can add logic to copy it into the .config/chromium directory. I kept the original post concise rather than writing an extended explanation.

ericbsd

@grahamperrin, regarding transparency, if you refer to @vimanuelt saying that I am onboard with the change, it is not on the forums. I discuss most of the devs/contributors-related issues on https://t.me/ghostbsd_dev. It is not private.

ericbsd

That video makes a good point about Firefox and is derivative. Brave is not in ports, and using it without a Linux layer is impossible. That said, we do know that Chromium-based browsers are not going anywhere.

grahamperrin

ericbsd That video makes a good point

First impression: anti-Mozilla propaganda.

Speculation.

Biased.

Stirring things up, fanning the flames – instead of being calm, logical, and rational. The poop-stirring is good for clicks, and clicks = money.

grahamperrin

grahamperrin I gained the impression that you had approved

For clarity: "you" meant @ericbsd

ericbsd

grahamperrin As I said in the dev Telegram group, I am not against the change to UG Chromium. That said, it was kind of my seal of approval. I stand with @vimanuelt message. Vic started this topic on the Forum, but I started it in the Telegram user group. Vic added this discussion to the forum so that users who only use the forum know what's going on.

This change might not happen in the next release, but Firefox must be removed if Mozilla does not stop abusing user privacy. I have made my position clear on Telegram that I am unhappy with its current state, and that is also why I started that conversation on Telegram.

Brave would be my first pick, but it does not support FreeBSD. I have not investigated too deeply what would be the best choice, but ultimately, it is up to the community to come up with a solution.

There is another thing that Mozilla is doing that I will not start to talk about, because it is unrelated to privacy.

@grahamperrin, one thing you have not yet addressed with me is what transparency issue you are referring to.

« Previous Page Next Page »