113
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by ell1e@leminal.space to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Firefox is trying to gain back user trust with this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=O-xyNkvIB9g

This is a legit question: Should anybody trust Firefox again unless they put "we won't sell your data" back into the privacy policy? I'm actually not sure if they haven't already done so, let me elaborate:

https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Brave: "We do not sell, trade, or transfer your information to any third parties." This seems to obviously be in the legally binding text part. As is this one: "It’s Brave’s policy to not collect personal data1 unless it’s necessary to provide services to our users, or to meet certain legal obligations. We do not buy or sell personal data about consumers." (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.)

However, for Firefox it seems ambiguous to me, which worries me: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/#notice There is no appearance of "sell" in the entire privacy document, excpet for the top summary where i'm not sure if it's at all legally non-binding.

Does anybody know if it is legally binding? If Mozilla were serious about it, why would they leave it ambiguous whether it is...?

Based on that, I'm not sure if Mozilla's video about getting users back is worth trusting. I wonder if it's just me.

Update for clarification: I'm not using Brave myself, and this isn't a suggestion anybody should blindly do so.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CameronDev@programming.dev 92 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The reasoning for Firefox changing their policy is that legally, in some jurisdictions, a sale of data is very ambiguous.

They are sending a "count of active users" to advertisers, which their legal team thinks counts as a sale of private data.

Is this good enough a reason? Up to you really. Their policy is fairly wide open for further actual data sales now, it certainly gives me an itchy feeling.

[-] iamtherealwalrus@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Maybe I’m just an old, cynical man (I’m 44) but it’s not like their policy forces them to follow it, I mean why trust that “they promised they won’t do it in their policy” means they won’t just do it anyway without telling anyone?

[-] CameronDev@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

I think it's mostly a defence against getting sued if they got caught. Chrome can point at their policy and get the case dismissed, Firefox would have to defend it in court and risk losing.

But you are absolutely correct, privacy policy's are only as binding as your ability to enforce them, and you and I don't really have any means to enforce them against a large Corp.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] mistermodal@lemmy.ml 65 points 2 months ago

Very funny to mention Brave like it's a normal browser.

Why wait for that to start distrusting FF https://lemmy.ml/c/librewolf

[-] nothx@hexbear.net 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah I always love seeing Brave being mentioned as the better alternative to any browser.

Marketing works…

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] undone6988@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

OP works for Brave. Original post is just an ad.

[-] ell1e@leminal.space 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I use Librewolf myself, but I'm concerned about upstream Firefox dying so this whole situation frustrates me. The only reason I mention Brave is because Brave is also a company (unlike Librewolf) and has a Terms of use to compare Mozilla to (unlike Librewolf).

[-] undone6988@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago

I just know from a privacy standpoint that I always understood Brave to be a hardcore no even dating back to 2018.

[-] ell1e@leminal.space 3 points 2 months ago

That could be true, I honestly don't know. The crypto stuff in Brave definitely seems weird.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Libb@piefed.social 34 points 2 months ago

Trust is hard to gain, very easy to lose. And much harder to regain, once its lost.

I have been a Firefox user since... its Mosaic days. And even after Chrome became a thing, FF remained my default choice. It was just my browser, I would shrug at anyone telling me Chrome was so much better.

Alas, their recent switch in regards to data/ads and after that their focus on AI, after a few previous decisions of them that quite worried me too, convinced me to do what I had never imagined I would do: replace FF as my default browser.

I now use Waterfox, and if Firefox is still installed on my Linux box I have not used it since (I'm a liar: I clicked it once, out of habit). I just don't feel comfortable using it, it's not my browser anymore. It's just a browser, like Chrome or Edge, some corp is trying to force feed me, and to screw me with. Thx, but no.

I would love to see FF change path and regain my trust. But this will take some efforts.

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 months ago

I still remember the Mozilla Internet Application Suite before the browser part was spun off into Firefox and the email into Thunderbird. Some of their moves have been disappointing but I'll still never use Chrome

[-] Libb@piefed.social 6 points 2 months ago

I remember that too.

BTW, Waterfox is a fork of FF ;)

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

The advice I've always read is to avoid forks because they usually get security updates slower than the main browser. Is that true of waterfox?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 8 points 2 months ago

Same boat. Used Mozilla since back when you had to futz to get it to compile.

Fuck Mozilla. Fuck FireFox.

LibreWolf fixed what the Foundation and Board enahittified.

[-] Libb@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago

I feel more sadness than anger. Like I feel a lot more sad realizing younger people will probably not be able to experiment a free and truly personal web, like the elders among us did. That corporate-free Web used to be the norm... with its clumsiness and its many quirks, its ability to tolerate conflicting opinions too. Now, everything is policed and so... neutered. It's also ad-saturated. It has turned into a TV, just worse.

Seeing Mozilla take that pitiful road made we feel a lot more sadness than anger, really. They were one of the few that were supposed to stand for another model. But I was not that surprised either...

[-] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 4 points 2 months ago

Slap yourself. Don't accept defeat. Rage, rage against the dying of the 'net

[-] sidebro@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

Used Firefox for god knows how long. Reading your post made me want to try out Waterfox and I must say I really really like it so far. Gonna keep using it and maybe I'll even uninstall Firefox down the line.

[-] Libb@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago

No need to rush a decision, give it a swirl and you will see ;)

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] eruchitanda@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

Don't trust them. Trust open-source.

Use forks, and donate to known projects that exist for (at least) a few years.

[-] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 months ago

They legally cannot state that they will not sell data, because - according to some states' laws - things like "XX% of users utilise Google as their primary search engine" is already "selling user data".

Because they use user data to calculate that percentage, and it's being used in relationship with Google who is paying Mozilla.

[-] ell1e@leminal.space 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If this one corner case is the reason, why doesn't Mozilla put it into the legal text? I feel like the ambiguity hurts their position here. That Mozilla is silent about specifics in the legal text, seems rather scary to me.

[-] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 months ago

Because it's not one corner case. There are multiple - they have other sponsors and advertisers.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

For them to sell your data, they need to collect it first. And as of now, all data collection can still be opted out of.

[-] voxel@feddit.uk 11 points 2 months ago

They collect personal data before you even have the chance to opt out which is a clear violation of the GDPR. They promise to delete it within 30 days when you opt out, but is was collected nonetheless.

[-] ell1e@leminal.space 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's fair, but that requires the trust that they won't add any collection without telling people. And it seems like they kind of want a license for all data I enter into the browser, which again Brave doesn't seem to do. It's like Mozilla is going out of their way to look shady and to harm trust. It's sad. I've been using Firefox for a looong time until I left it behind.

[-] utopiah@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

trust that they won’t add any collection without telling people.

It's open source so you can inspect it. If you don't know how to do that you can pay for a 3rd party audit.

Also if it were to be found out, even without being open source via some pack inspection (e.g. using a software that checks if data is being sent to a server, e.g. imagine starting Firefox on a virtual machine then checking if any data goes to e.g. firefox.com) and it were to be published then their entire brand would be dead. So rationally speaking I don't think that's a worthwhile bet.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago

I need to manually opt out?

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 months ago

Use a Firefox fork that respects you

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You had me until you propped up brave as the good guy. I would sooner trust opera than brave. They’ve already been caught being sheisters with your data.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mspencer712@programming.dev 9 points 2 months ago

Buying the company usually means buying all of their user information as well. Other companies can change their policies too. I think you should judge them by their actions, and give them a chance to answer your questions before you condemn them.

(Did you try asking them about your concerns?)

[-] ell1e@leminal.space 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Since there are alternatives, I don't find that argument too compelling. I'm hoping people will continue to speak up about this though. Ideally I would want Mozilla to do better with their policy, assuming they actually act nice and just aren't very good at making their policy sound like it.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Lynx doesn't sell your data, use it

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Dunno. Ive already left. Now its on them to give me a good enough reason to consider going back.

[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago
[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Waterfox, brave, many options.

[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 months ago

Brave is shit I don't know why people keep recommending it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bourgeoisie_burgers@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Maybe mozilla is just more honest than crypto and affiliate scammers? They all sell your data , just have to try and give as little as possible to them.

[-] jaypatelani@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

Problem with FOSS movement happened is not all parts are self sustainable. Which leads to market fit revenue system which is basically selling data as of now. Hope this changes in future.

[-] BoblinTheGoblin@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

I think when they defended the removal they said they changed it because the definition of "sell" was quite broad in some jurisdictions

[-] Tywele@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago

https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Brave: “We do not sell, trade, or transfer your information to any third parties.” This is obviously in the legally binding text part.

This is only for data that the user transmits to them in conjunction with feedback.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] zebidiah@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
113 points (83.4% liked)

Privacy

48752 readers
486 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS