

Orfox: New Firefox-based Android Private/Secure Browser - conductor
https://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/guardian-dev/2014-August/003717.html

======
hackuser
There is a growing market for privacy (confidentiality), in my amateur
opinion; at least it seems that many consumers choose privacy when given the
option and they dislike surveillance.

Why doesn't Mozilla heavily promote Firefox as the 'private' browser, and why
not focus on enhancing those features, instead of leaving it to others to make
the 'private' browsers by modifying Firefox?

1) Otherwise browsers are functionally the same for consumers, ignoring
trendiness and user familiarity. Some browsers may do certain things
milliseconds faster, or more often be perceived to perform faster, but there
is little practical difference besides confidentiality. (I realize this may be
controversial to some, but I doubt choice of browser impacts most people's
productivity beyond confidentiality issues.)

2) Other browser vendors could not easily compete with Mozilla in the area of
confidentiality: Their business models often include tracking consumer
behavior, and their brands are not as trusted to put users first as a public
interest organization is (and it depends on trust; consumers can't verify
these things themselves).

3) Other browser vendors would be forced to try to compete regardless and
improve confidentiality, and awareness of and demand for confidentiality would
be increased, furthering Mozilla's missions. I think demand for
confidentiality often is overlooked because consumers rarely have the
opportunity to express it -- it's hardly ever an option.

Regarding the features: Not all confidentiality features are suited for
general use (e.g., NoScript), but many are and some could be options for more
advanced users. For example, why isn't there a Tor button or pref in Mozilla's
official Firefox releases, which connects to Tor and routes all traffic
through it? IME, it works fine, though a little more slowly, for most
purposes.

EDIT: A few additions and clarifications.

~~~
asadotzler
"There is a growing market for privacy (confidentiality), in my amateur
opinion; at least it seems that many consumers choose privacy when given the
option and they dislike surveillance."

I think this is mostly a myth when it comes to consumer software. People _say_
they like privacy/confidentiality/security but they are not willing to make
any compromises to get it even if those compromises are very small in
comparison to the privacy/security wins.

~~~
hackuser
Asa: Thanks for the input though of course I hope you are wrong. :) Is there
research on that? Your experience at Mozilla?

I do know a a few data points: (EDIT: walterbell provides a very good data
point below, and one that should have been obvious to me!)

* Some vendors of confidentiality services report increased demand, especially since the Snowden revelations. (Sorry, I don't remember who reported it.)

* Facebook and others now are emphasizing privacy, suggesting that they see demand for it.

* A recent consumer survey said confidentiality concerns were impacting purchases on mobile devices.

* Also I read in an advertising industry publication that when a retail store chain posted signs saying they were tracking customer activities (via wifi/bluetooth on mobile devices), they got many complaints and saw an impact.

* Their solution of course was to take down the signs, which raises another point: If consumers/citizens don't care about surveillance, then why are businesses and government secretive about it?

~~~
thisisrobv
Privacy is a factor, it's just not the factor that drives most decisions
around consumer software (at least mass market adoption). It's true that
Facebook and others have emphasized privacy, but they have not compromised the
user experience. Projects like this are challenging because you're forcing
some behavioral changes for additional security.

