* the asset file is fetched every 7 days.ĭefaultPref("", " ") ĭefaultPref("_only_mode", true) // only allow https in all windows, including private browsingĭefaultPref("-http-auth-allow", 1) // stop cross-origin resources from using HTTP authenticationĭefaultPref("security.insecure_connection_text.enabled", true) // display http websites as insecure in the uiĭefaultPref("security.mixed_content.block_display_content", true) // block insecure passive contentĭefaultPref("6", true) // disable ipv6 * librewolf specific pref that allows to include the query stripping lists in uBO by default. * currently we use the same one that brave uses:ĭefaultPref("privacy.query_stripping.enabled", true) ĭefaultPref("privacy.query_stripping.strip_list", "_hsfp _hssc _hstc _s _hsenc _openstat dclid fbclid gbraid gclid hsCtaTracking igshid mc_eid ml_subscriber ml_subscriber_hash msclkid oly_anon_id oly_enc_id rb_clickid s_cid twclid vero_conv vero_id wbraid wickedid yclid") * enable query stripping and set the strip list. prevent websites from storing session data like cookies and forms, increase time between session savesĭefaultPref("_level", 2) ĭefaultPref("", 60000) disable browsing, search and form historyĭefaultPref("", false) ĭefaultPref("", false) We disable it but cookies and site data are still cleared per session unless exceptions are set.Īll the cleaning prefs true by default except for siteSetting and offlineApps, which is what we want.ĭefaultPref("", false) ĭefaultPref("", true) ĭefaultPref("", 0) This way of sanitizing cookies would override the exceptions set by the users and just delete everything, make third party and http cookies session-onlyĭefaultPref("", true) ĭefaultPref("", true) Pref("", "strict") ĭefaultPref("", 5) // dFPI is default for strict mode, but enforceĭefaultPref("", 2) // keep cookies until end of the session, then clearĭefaultPref("", true) // isolate service workers cookie cleaning mechanism specific to dFPI
stricter policies for xorigin referrers shims to avoid breakage caused by blocking lists strict blocking lists for trackers, including crypto, fping and socialtracking dFPI for both normal and private browsing Just in case it is needed i will share the librewolf cfg here:ĭefaultPref("", "5.4") Maybe i missunderstand but 200x100 pixels appears to be way to smal? Now im worried those results are not 100% accurate and therefore if websites read my browser size i will already be different from every single user that has the default window size, which results in me being way more unique. So when i took that screenshot from firefox without the custom cfg i got this:ĭefaultPref("", 1284) ĭefaultPref("", 1064) Functionallity appears to be 100% still.Įxpect that i had to remove the resist fingerprinting part because firefox was using other window size than normally. Librewolf has little worse performance than firefox so i decided to experimente and take the cfg from librewolf than paste it into the original firefox. When i checked Librewolf i found that they are using their own firefox.cfg The next browser in line which seems to be good is actually a fork of firefox, = Librewolf. A privacy browser owned by an AD company, common seriously? So not an option. Sorry to say but i lost trust in mozilla because of the big partnership with google.įirefox as it is now is not 100% open source, so who knows what's in the x% that are closed source.Īnyways back to topic, i was searching for alternative browser and found waterfox which was looking good at first but then i noticed it has very bad performance and also it was acquired by an adversting company -system1. I dont trust mozilla anymore since rumors say around 70% of their income is from google which is clearly hostile to privacy.
Librewolf windows windows#
I used the built in tool from windows called snipping tool to take a "screenshot" from my browser to figure out what size it is using, however the result might not be 100% accurate. To explain why i want to know this value: If you dont mind, i am interested in both default values, with and without resist fingerprinting.
0 kommentar(er)
