63
LinuxHello,
I've heard that Ubuntu may not fully prioritize user privacy and collects telemetry data. Could you please clarify:
Is this accurate? Are there Linux distributions that place a stronger emphasis on privacy?
Thank you 🙏🏼
What's up with all these people treating Lemmy like a search engine recently?
It's like Reddit. No one searches and just assumes everyone "works for them"
Gets hardened, privacy focussed distro.
Logs into Google on browser.
I do use Firefox for browser and for YouTube, I use an external client that manages a local account without Google (for favorites, and watched history in example). But... I can't resist and want to comment on videos or reply to other comments. Therefore I log into my Google account in Firefox just to comment... The YouTube account has history disabled and some other stuff that Google would collect, and therefore cripple my options and features to use YouTube in the browser.
I am fully aware of the irony to log into Google, while trying to be privacy aware. But the comments... man the comments get me all the time. It's part of the fun watching YouTube videos to me.
Ubuntu now doesn't enable telemetry by default, but ironically I always enable telemetry when it is disabled and disable when enabled by default.
but ironically I always enable telemetry when it is disabled and disable when enabled by default.
Because reverse psychology. People always does or assume the opposite, because people assume the others wants to hurt them. Yes I made that up and am just joking, but maybe there is some logic behind it. Don't take this as some sort of personal attack!
Well I assume that if it is enabled by default there is nefarius thoughts involved, but when it isn't devs have to little data to work with...
Well I assume that if it is enabled by default there is nefarius thoughts involved, but when it isn't devs have to little data to work with...
Linux distributions are miles ahead in terms of privacy compared to other commercial operating systems, so just use one, if you want even more privacy, I guess there are distributions that route all your internet through tor.
To answer your second question specifically:
Are there Linux distributions that place a stronger emphasis on privacy?
Yes, luckily most distros do.
If you just want decent privacy, then honestly most of the popular distros are better than Ubuntu.
Ubuntu has a history together with amazon, sending search queries in the application starter for example. There are better distros out there, like Mint.
If you use Debian, even the simple “package popularity contest” is a default “no” in the installer.
That said, your personal conception of privacy is gonna be different than lots of other people’s.
Depends what your threat model is, if you absolutely want no data about you whatsoever possibly leaving the device because it endangers you then Tails OS is probably the most private distro out there as others have mentioned, but it's use case is specifically to be used for very private stuff and working through a live USB stick so that nothing remains on the device.
For the average person any distro is a huge improvement privacy wise over Windows, though Ubuntu does have ties to Amazon since it's owned by Canonical, so if there's any Linux distro you should avoid for privacy reasons it's Ubuntu. It's still incomparably private relative to Windows, but you have nothing to lose and a lot to gain by choosing other alternatives, Mint is just as easy and user friendly as Ubuntu without most of the bloat and Amazon crap.
Listen, anything is better than Windows. That being said, Ubuntu is about as close as Linux gets to Windows in data collection and robbing control from the user. It's the only distro I recommend everyone to NOT use.
Not exactly anything there is still redstaros and astra linux
Ubuntu is about as close as Linux gets to Windows in data collection in data collection and robbing control from the user.
While Ubuntu does have a worse track record in both departments compared to any other distro, it's worth noting that neither data collection nor the patronising of users are close to Windows levels. (Your comment might be understood like that.)
Imagine drinking a fancy cocktail - that's most Linux distros.
Ubuntu is like that, but with a few sprinkles of piss mixed in.
Windows is mostly piss these days, but with a cherry and a little umbrella, and it's what everyone's having, so it can't be that bad - right?
If windows is 100% nightmare, Ubuntu is like 5 to 10% that. While other distros are 0 to 1 percent.
It’s important to understand that many distro’s are usually based off of another.
We got Debian based distros such as Debian, Ubuntu, PopOS, KaliLinux, LinuxMint and so on, Arch based distros such as CachyOS, SteamOS, Arch and so on and Fedora based distros such as Fedora, Nobara, Bazzite.
Once you learn one of these base distros switching to another within its field is easy as majority of shell commands will be identical.
Cachy is Arch, Bazzite is Fedora.
My bad, thought I could do it by memory.
Minor error here, Cachy is arch BTW 😂
It has been corrected. Apologies.
I'd like to suggest Linux Mint: It allows you to use guides and software written for Ubuntu but disables all the scummy stuff.
Most distros don’t collect any data by default.
Basically any distro not built and maintained by a company will be a thousand times more private than Mac or windows. Arch and Debian are both good in that regard, most distros are derived from those. There is also Fedora which is a community project, but it’s very heavily involved with Red Hat inc who is owned by IBM. I’ve never heard about any privacy issues there, but, it’s worth keeping in mind.
If you want something super secure and locked down in regards to privacy, there is Tails which has a lot of neat tricks and tor built in. Not sure I’d recommend it as a daily driver but it’s got it’s use cases.
Tails isn't really a security focused distro, no significant kernel or other security hardening. It is amnesic. Whonix (based on Kicksecure) is security hardened but still based on Debian which isn't great for a security base.
Secureblue is what I would recommend because it a security focused Linux distro that benefits from Fedora's SELinux, and has a bunch of its own additions.
QubesOS is obviously the best for security. Combine that with a Whonix or Secureblue guest OS and you're perfect.
I completely forgot secureblue. But it was not worth the hassle for my working environment
It is very private, by nature of it recording so little and leaving so little trace. Which is what was being asked about, not strictly speaking security.
I was specifically responding to at the end where you say it is "super secure" at the end of your comment. It is not a security focused distro. It isnt even (only) a privacy distro. It is an anonymity distro. Fedora is private, but it doesnt store everything in RAM or route everything through Tor, so it isn't amnesic or anonymity focused.
When compared to Whonix (which is Debian based like Tails) or Secureblue (Fedora Atomic based), Tails doesnt do nearly anything to harden its base other than to strictly proxy the network through Tor, run in RAM, and some default apps.
I’ve never heard about any privacy issues there, but, it’s worth keeping in mind
You would hear about it, and as someone happy there, it's a recurring nightmare, but an actual credible threat would be worth so many dollars lost to them that there's a low likelihood. Shit, Torvalds runs fedora, still, keep a weather eye open.
Mostly Linux has the virtue of the many eyes on open source protection, but it's far from absolute, as the rise of supply chain exploits demonstrates.
Hannah Montana Linux
As others said Ubuntu got kinda scummy. I always send people that are new or have decision paralysis here
tbh you'll likely find yourself better using anything else that isn't Ubuntu. Debian is cool if you're okay with your desktop environment being a bit behind (as for apps you can5use flatpaks for the most up to the date, it also is good if you need most app support as it can install .deb) or arch if you want to learn a bit more about how your little penguin lives inside that metal box of yours! Fedora I am not sure as I think they implement or will implement telemetry.
One last thing is that not all telemetry is bad. if you take a look at KDE's initial prompt for telemetry it is anonymous and is used to simply try and make the DE better
After user outrage Fedora settled on opt-in telemetry instead of opt-out. So unless you actively choose to send telemetry you're not gonna do it with Fedora.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Metrics
(old proposal, the opt-out one:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Telemetry )
Even Debian has popcon as an opt in. I can see why collecting data about hardware and package choices is useful to Ubuntu. I didn't think they collected any personally identifying information.
I found a homemade Ubuntu 8.04 installer disk the other day, simpler times. It had it's place.
I will never forgive the amazon partnership with the desktop search bar.
Yes, it's accurate. Although I enjoyed using Ubuntu (iirc started with 5.10 or 6.10) due to it's friendliness to newcomers, Canonical is on the business side of Linux distributions (think Redhat).
Debian (which Ubuntu is derived from), is privacy friendly and leans heavily towards the open source ethos imo.
With that being said there's tons of options out there. Distrowatch is a great place to window shop before grabbing a live .iso :)
Privacy or Security? Security would be something like Fedora Atomic. Privacy (and security?) QubesOS , TailsOS But as Linux is FOSS, you can just take any distro and form it as you like.
Fedora Atomic is not more secure than traditional Fedora. That is a misconception.
Qubes, Kicksecure/Whonix, and Secureblue are basically the only major security focused Linux distros.
Tails is focused on anonymity, not simply privacy (same with Whonix). Tails is not really security hardened.
Why is Fedora atomic not more secure? It is literally immutable. Which kills the concept of persistent malware, unless they archive a complex exploit chain to gain root and install a malicious package and then reboot into the new iso, which is easier said then done.
There are dozens of articles about why Ubuntu has drawn criticism, here is an example: https://abh.ai/blog/why-ubuntu-and-canonical-drew-criticism-many-members-foss-community
I would recommend you read some of them to make up your own mind, and don't rely too much on opinions here. Privacy is a broad term, only you know what is important to you and where you would draw the line.
Dissapointed that no one has mentioned TempleOS.
I know, I know, not linux, but very private.
Your fingerprint being one of like five people running TempleOS would deanonymize you lol.
I like Solus. You can be productive while not being tracked.
Qubes if you're being chased by FBI but I guess that's not the case.
