{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreief47c22nkczmvclqaeigb4cbhuyil7fcvfsn7ksif6y3oxahxkxa",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mpqog3igfik2"
  },
  "path": "/t/is-secureblue-really-more-secure-if-browsers-have-to-be-installed-in-flatpaks/38287#post_17",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-03T13:39:49.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "tags": [
    "Selecting a Browser - Chromium Hardening Guide",
    "fingerprint.com"
  ],
  "textContent": "> however, as it doesn’t have manifest V3 it doesn’t have a great ad blocker\n\nI personally feel not difference between uBO and uBOL. What it disabled is MV2 btw.\n\n> it’s also got a unique fingerprint so it’s not great from a privacy standpoint.\n\nEvery browser has a unique fingerprint. Only Safari has reasonable strategy. Selecting a Browser - Chromium Hardening Guide\n\nI tried Brave and Firefox built-in anti-fingerprint, they can’t even beat fingerprint.com",
  "title": "Is secureblue really more secure if browsers have to be installed in flatpaks?"
}