{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibsnivy46ecwwfmazfyd6lmvhjftvp2oulfcpzbuulzabq6mfnq4q",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mprcks3yav42"
  },
  "path": "/t/is-secureblue-really-more-secure-if-browsers-have-to-be-installed-in-flatpaks/38287#post_20",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-03T17:54:33.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "tags": [
    "Fingerprint randomization | Brave",
    "https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/"
  ],
  "textContent": "Most browsers try to defeat fingerprinting by making all users look the same, brave’s approach is a little different they randomise a bunch of stuff. So each user actually has a unique fingerprint fingerprint but that changes from session to session and is as divorced from anything about them as brave is able to reasonably make it Fingerprint randomization | Brave\n\nBecause most fingerprint checkers check for the “make everyone look the same” approach brave gets flagged as having a unique fingerprint, which is true, but (unintentionally) misrepresents brave’s fingerprinting protection. The eff’s tool does account for randomisation and brave is rated well on that https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/\n\nThe developers of secureblue are focused on security not privacy and don’t seem to care that much about privacy (for gods sakes they recommend chrome) or open source. TBH the more I read the more confused I am by their attitude, because if you want a secure system but don’t care about open source or privacy then why not use a mac? Though I’m still happy the project exists as it helps improve linux security and hopefully the security improvements they’ve made can make their way into more linux distros.",
  "title": "Is secureblue really more secure if browsers have to be installed in flatpaks?"
}