Restic (local repo) which I sync onto a Hetzner Storagebox using rclone.

No. NoScript has more granular control over the different kinds of things that you can block per domain and is more similar to the now discontinued uMatrix in that regard.

All right, here goes nothing.

I came to the conclusion that what you said didn’t make much sense after you called Librewolf prehardened Firefox, which—while not a completely alien assertion—is not exactly very accurate as I explained in my previous comment.

What’s worse though is that you continue making exotic assertions like the hide in the crowd + randomization theory without backing them up with anything, while simultaneously asking for arguments(?) and evidence supporting my relatively straightforward and popular position–both of which I have presented very clearly in my previous comments by the way.

What you fail to deliver in the meantime are explanations as to A) how Brave’s approach is different or unique compared to anything that any hardened/forked/otherwise enhanced readily available Firefox could offer and B) why Brave’s particular approach to privacy is then also objectively better than the multiple different approaches that various Firefox configs and forks offer.

But wait, I’m not done yet. You also fail to explain why you consider Mullvad Browser or Tor to be “completely different things” as you suggested just now. Brave is the best Chromium based thing out there in terms of privacy, shouldn’t it then be fair to match it against the best of Firefox’ class? Or is it because Tor Browser targets a very specific user base and is less fit for your average every-day surfing and that’s why you think the comparison isn’t sound. In that case I bear bad news about your deep well of knowledge on web browsers, because Mullvad Browser is based on Tor Browser but doesn’t require any overlay network of any kind in order to function properly.

And since engaging with you has not yet led to anything of value, I will refrain from partaking in this discussion any further unless this changes.

Decentraleyes is a bit outdated. LocalCDN does the same thing and is more up-to-date.

Tmux is screen in more powerful. Zellij is another great terminal multiplexer. Worth giving all of them a whirl.

Librewolf is not really prehardened Firefox, Librewolf is Firefox with the Mozilla stuff torn out. It’s more private than regular FF but a long way out from Tor or Mullvad browser. You’re right that out of the box Brave will provide better privacy than Librewolf, but everything else you said doesn’t really make much sense.

This actually drastically decreases privacy and makes you more trackable. The best thing to do with your user agent is to set it to the most common one and leave it at that. Anything else (especially an ever-changing one) is a much more uniquely identifying piece of information.

Exhibit A: The Tor Browser, which focuses on maximizing privacy, is based on Firefox rather than Chromium. They upstream a lot of their major stuff to regular Firefox.

Exhibit B: Firefox therefore has privacy features that Chromium-based browsers just do not have, like first-party isolation or letterboxing for example.

Brave’s preconfiguration is a lot more private than Firefox out of the box, but hardened* Firefox is more private than Brave even with extra work put in.

*: Not just configuration (Arkenfox) but also patches. Like Librewolf (better) or Mullvad Browser (even better) or straight up Tor Browser (best).

Brave is more secure in terms of security. Security and safety are two entirely different attributes from a technical pov. And privacy and security are also not the same, though privacy is greatly impacted without security as you implied.

Firefox is more private than Brave but less secure. Neither is necessarily safer than the other, it depends on how much either app tends to misbehave within the constraints of your own use case. Since the use cases are different (privacy vs. security), it’s harder to compare safety on an even playing field.