Waterfox: Fast and Private Web Browser
59 comments
·February 28, 2025meitham
lnx01
Waterfox isn't new, its first release was in 2011. I used to run it because they had an x86-64 build when Firefox didn't.
meitham
You're absolutely right but attribution is still the core issue here. I clicked on the page because it seemed like a promising alternative to Firefox, and I expected the focus to be on how it differs from Firefox. Instead, I was surprised to see Firefox completely ignored, especially when the project is clearly built on its foundation and even borrows part of its name. It feels like a missed opportunity to acknowledge the very platform that made Waterfox possible in the first place. Transparency and credit matter, especially in open-source projects.
MrAlex94
You aren't wrong, at all, but as mentioned I have run into issues with this in the past. I don't have enough income for the rigmarole Mozilla would put us through, even though I attempted in the past.
FWIW in regards to features: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43206110
lolinder
Is it a hard fork that's been maintained since 2011 without pulling? Or is it a soft fork that's still pulling from upstream regularly?
If it's the former attribution still matters, but if it's the latter lack of attribution is outright dishonest.
wakawaka28
They aren't hiding the fact that they forked, so it's not dishonest. Nobody really expects a fork to never merge again from upstream. The point of it is increased privacy as opposed to improving the browser fundamentally anyway. I don't give a fuck if they do or don't say "we still merge from upstream btw" (and they did hard fork at some point, so I highly doubt they even try to keep up). This isn't a mere rebranding of Firefox to steal credit.
Jotalea
Not a full comparison, but they do mention Firefox:
> Waterfox is an impressive example of what a better version of Firefox can look like: leaner, faster, and without the desire to collect your data.
null
vik0
Waterfox is not new
immibis
What I really want to know is the difference between Waterfox, Librewolf, and Palemoon.
wakawaka28
Don't forget IceCat!
frereubu
Yeah, reading this page with no mention of Firefox feels a bit weird - I was asking myself the whole time what the relationship is. All I needed was something saying "a privacy-preserving fork of Firefox" or similar to put that to bed so I could concentrate on the rest of the content.
MrAlex94
Mozilla have made legal threats in the past about mentioning ANYTHING to do with Firefox.
So I steer well clear.
The irony(?) being we used to be listed on the Mozilla website :) https://web.archive.org/web/20121229210505/http://www.mozill...
hnuser123456
Thank you for maintaining this, glad to see it's still going. It was funny to see Mozilla fumble their policy update while apparently trying to be vague.
I see your headline features are anti-tracking, private tabs, and container tabs, but do you still do any performance optimizations beyond Firefox, either in code or by compiler?
Ah, I see you mention this for 6.5.0:
"We have now bumped the “tuned” CPU code generation to match Skylake2 processor instruction sets. This should result in better performance if you have an Intel Skylake (or equivalent AMD processor) or better."
Do you continue to see some measurable performance improvements in WF over FF thanks to compiler optimizations?
Wish you the best with your v7.0 build system.
knowitnone
I don't know how they can sue for mentioning their product and that's very scummy behavior
jisnsm
I’m pretty sure it’s completely legal to mention trademarks when comparing your product to others.
mrbluecoat
..as well as Brave browser
ge96
We were working with azure bing 7 for API search had issues switched to Brave working so far. The results don't match but yeah (looking for PDFs).
Throwthrowbob
I had stopped using Waterfox in 2020 because of their association with System1, an advertising company. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22338321
I learned today that Waterfox cut ties with System1 in July of 2023, so I'm glad to have an alternative to switch to. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36590056 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36606210
linwangg
Waterfox has always been an interesting alternative for those who wanted Firefox without the telemetry and other bloat. But in 2025, does it still offer a unique enough advantage compared to something like LibreWolf or Mullvad Browser?
The legacy add-on support is great, but is there a real use case for it now? Most extensions have moved on, and even Pale Moon has struggled to keep older add-ons alive. Also, how does Waterfox’s approach to privacy compare to hardened Firefox configurations (e.g., user.js tweaks or Arkenfox)?
Would love to hear from long-time Waterfox users—what’s keeping you on it in 2025?
steeleduncan
Is this Firefox rebranded with anything privacy breaking removed?
Personally that is what I want. A minimal set of diffs on top of Firefox that turns off anything obnoxious Mozilla might (or might not) add, but is close enough to the original codebase that it can be updated with security fixes right away
n4r9
It sounds like LibreWolf and Waterfox both fall into this category. Difficult to distinguish much between the two.
There's a 2yo reddit thread [0] in which the Waterfox founder claims that Waterfox balances privacy with usability, and has the advantage of an auto-update feature. This could be outdated as I just installed LibreWolf and there definitely was an auto-update option in the installation dialog.
There's also an article on OnionEngine [1] which compares the two. According to this, Waterfox has support for legacy add-ons, but unlike LibreWolf does not necessarily disable trackers by default. Hard to see how up to date the article is.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/waterfox/comments/14seevh/comment/j...
[1] https://onionengine.io/blog/waterfox-vs-librewolf/
By the sounds of it, if you have a strong privacy prefence and don't mind compromising usability for the sake of privacy, Libre Wolf may be the better bet.
molticrystal
Librewolf portable [0] is available via the PortableApps.com launcher, which is great for keeping it from scattering files everywhere or for carrying it on a USB drive for Win32/Wine users. Waterfox Classic used to be available, but that stopped a long time ago, and the new Waterfox was never available, to my knowledge. Additionally, the portable version of Librewolf, while lagging slightly as most portable editions do, is updated fairly frequently.
This is why I ended up choosing Librewolf - I prefer to have more control over where files are stored on the Windows platform. I also took the extra step of creating the TempForPortableApps [1] folder as well.
[0] https://portableapps.com/apps/internet/librewolf-portable
n4r9
That's a great shout. Portable versions of apps are really useful if you want to sync tools e.g. over syncthing/pCloud/Dropbox, or you work for companies with draconian installation policies.
antisthenes
The modern version of Waterfox does not support legacy addons.
There's a Waterfox Classic, which does, but even that is mostly obsolete these days (add-ons may work, but many websites don't). And I don't think it's getting regular security updates.
yapyap
Maybe just an updated user.js would be enough for this goal?
steeleduncan
Ah, interesting, I was unaware of user.js
It seems https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js is a comprehensive set of settings for that
hypeatei
I understand that people need alternatives that work now but please consider contributing your developer expertise and/or donating to Ladybird[0] / Servo[1]. We need to get away from our current engine duopoly of Chromium/Gecko (yes I know webkit exists)
[0]: https://ladybird.org
[1]: https://servo.org
jaggs
No Windows version? Really? Wow!
Semaphor
2019, 109 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20047170
2021, 101 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28815747
bernds74
How do we actually know these browser forks don't contain malware of their own? If you can hide something in a tiny package like xz-utils... and a browser would seem to be a very juicy target.
Rooster61
Possible, but Waterfox has been out there long enough that I'd think someone would have picked up on it by now. Especially with it being marketed as a more secure Firefox.
EDIT: I'm not the one that downvoted the op. Not sure why it's getting heat, it's a valid question.
amazingamazing
> but Waterfox has been out there long enough that I'd think someone would have picked up on it by now.
lol that doesn't mean anything. it's good that it's open source, but time unfortunately is not an indicator since it doesn't necessarily imply anything about the amount of those checking or the quality of said checks.
echoangle
Do you audit every software you run? Which linux distro are you running? What do you do before installing a package you want to use?
I wouldn't just install everything I find on the internet but at some point you have to be realistic.
34679
I wonder why this was pushed off the front page?
This is my first comment while using Waterfox. Installing and adding ublock was nearly identical to the countless Firefox installs I've done. Painless.
So long, Mozilla, it's been a nice couple decades.
jqpabc123
Ad blocking?
The browser many not track you but the ad networks do. Without ad blocking, your browsing really isn't all that private.
34679
It takes less than a minute to add ublock
jqpabc123
Ok, so perhaps the fact that an addon is needed to achieve real privacy should be pointed out somewhere on the web site amongst all the discussion about privacy.
If they're just copying Mozilla's half hearted approach to privacy, it should be pointed out that browser updates have been known to disable add-ons so this becomes an ongoing issue.
It takes no time/effort to add real privacy to LibreWolf and keep it active because it is built-in. The same applies to other browsers which claim to offer real privacy by default.
butterlettuce
Anyone looking to get temporary containers working properly:
1. about:debugging
2. This Waterfox
3. Find the Temporary Containers "extension"
4. Inspect (which opens Dev tools)
5. Go to Storage > Extension Storage
6. Change containerPrefix value from "waterfox" to "firefox"
mikae1
The really cool thing about Waterfox is that REAL vim keyboard navigation via VimFX[1] has been supported.
The integration is much deeper than what Vimium and the other WebExtensions allow.
cholantesh
>The integration is much deeper than what Vimium and the other WebExtensions allow.
Rather a dubious claim. Vimium is what VimFx is modelled on, and Vimium was always intended to be pretty minimalist compared to, eg, Vimperator, whose only real successor, Tridactyl, is a WebExtension.
enumer8
been using waterfox for a long time now and have very little to complain about. it's lean, snappy, and generally very easy to get along with as a browser. trouble is that pesky memory leak issue that seems to plague gecko-based browsers.
I really enjoy seeing new projects, especially now with Mozilla's updated TOS, but this project's page really bothers me!
Why include a feature comparison table with browsers like Chrome and Edge, but leave out Firefox? Your project is built on Firefox, and you even borrowed half of its name. Attribution matters. If Mozilla were to shut down Firefox and all its users left, would Waterfox even survive?