@SlowCoderEh ... Any Linux distro is only as private as you make it. My main distro is LMDE5. I enable the firewall, and lock down any services I happen to run. I run Firefox with DuckDuckGo, and uBlock Origin. I only install software from trusted sources, and ask myself "do I really need it?" If someone else needs to use my laptop, they are given a separate non-admin user account.
The only laptop that travels with me does not contain any important or really private files, should it be lost.
But I don't encrypt my drives, and I don't subscribe to VPNs.
I feel safe enough, but I am watchful of signs of issues.
Privacy and security is always up to the user.![]()
The most private is the one whose kernel you wrote yourself and nobody has access to its source code.What is the most Private Linux Distro?
I need a fully functional Linux and as close to "ready out of the box" as possible.
It will be mainly for Web Development, but from what I've been said, almost every linux is the same as it supports more or less the same apps.
I've seen Parrot "Home Edition" mentioned a few times. Is this the most private?
Nothing wrong with this setup. Do what makes you feel safest.I only possess 1 laptop and i prefer this way for simplicity.
Personally i encrypt my drives and use vpn.
@SlowCoder,Nothing wrong with this setup. Do what makes you feel safest.
The issue is, that you can download one of a number of privacy distros, which are more niche/specialized, probably not new user friendly, but include privacy browsers, TOR, etc. Or you can download any mainstream distro and install the same browsers and tools. You're you really getting anything unique from a privacy based distro.
I've not heard of any truly egregious cases of telemetry gathering in the Linux community, where actual user data is exposed. All cases I'm aware of are anonymized and tend to be limited to error reporting or pings. This data can help with development and management of resources. However, users should be notified, and be allowed to disable this telemetry as desired. Zorin OS is guilty of nondisclosure. But Ubuntu allows the user to disable telemetry during install. If there ever was an egregious case, the community would quickly be informed and that distro no longer trusted.@SlowCoder,
This is a very important point! And one of the reasons i will probably be a Linux lover maybe for life. No limitations!
This way i can just choose a distro i like and that's it.
But aren't some distros owned by companies who handle data a little different?
For instance, Linux Mint states they respect (user privacy data), and only handle statistical stuff. Ubuntu does not respect privacy the same way.
I read similar statements for Zorin OS - Parrot "Home Edition" and Manjaro.
Please let me know your point of view on this point?
Ofc i will go over these 3 distros and see which i like best.
Yes, using the internet involves somebody putting information about "you" into a spreadsheet somewhere. You can throw off your scent with VPNs etc, but in the end someone is watching you. Ubuntu does ask permission for location serves and fixing bugs, so I don’t really get too worried about canonical.@SlowCoder,
This is a very important point! And one of the reasons i will probably be a Linux lover maybe for life. No limitations!
This way i can just choose a distro i like and that's it.
But aren't some distros owned by companies who handle data a little different?
For instance, Linux Mint states they respect (user privacy data), and only handle statistical stuff. Ubuntu does not respect privacy the same way.
I read similar statements for Zorin OS - Parrot "Home Edition" and Manjaro.
Please let me know your point of view on this point?
Ofc i will go over these 3 distros and see which i like best.
@SlowCoderI've not heard of any truly egregious cases of telemetry gathering in the Linux community, where actual user data is exposed. All cases I'm aware of are anonymized and tend to be limited to error reporting or pings. This data can help with development and management of resources. However, users should be notified, and be allowed to disable this telemetry as desired. Zorin OS is guilty of nondisclosure. But Ubuntu allows the user to disable telemetry during install. If there ever was an egregious case, the community would quickly be informed and that distro no longer trusted.
Mint is my chosen OS, and I don't remember any telemetry coming from it. However, I moved from the mainline Mint to LMDE to further remove myself from Canonical. Not that I specifically have a problem with Canonical, but they are a company, and as a company may not necessarily be trusted to have the best interest of the community at heart.
@CrazedNerdYes, using the internet involves somebody putting information about "you" into a spreadsheet somewhere. You can throw off your scent with VPNs etc, but in the end someone is watching you. Ubuntu does ask permission for location serves and fixing bugs, so I don’t really get too worried about canonical.
No. It means they collected data without consent. Which means they did NOT respect.English is not my native language. "Zorin OS is guilty of nondisclosure." means they respect user private data, right?
Linux Mint has their mainline distribution, which is based on Ubuntu. They have a separate distribution called Linux Mint Debian Edition, which is based directly off Debian. I believe both of them respect privacy.So LMDE being Debian based is a private distro too?
I would say Ubuntu can be trusted. They have done well communicating with the community, and their latest version defaults to no telemetry.Stuff that i read from some sources, for me, it's enough not to trust Ubuntu.
With security, there's no "enough". Privacy kinda sucks if you think about it too much.@CrazedNerd
Indeed. Windows 10 itself is a spying tool!
But isn't a very well secured Linux with a well built firewall, Mullvad VPN, and fingerprint add-ons for Firefox and other private browsers enough to reduce this? At the browsing level it should block a lot, but for the OS itself it comes down to a lot of knowledge and time.
Please let me know your view here.
@SlowCoderNo. It means they collected data without consent. Which means they did NOT respect.
Amen.With security, there's no "enough". Privacy kinda sucks if you think about it too much.
@SlowCoderI can't really speak to any external firewalls. I've always considered a soft firewall to be sufficient.
The benefit of a soft firewall is that it goes wherever your machine goes, without extra hardware.
I know, and i have this in my near future plans.Besides, I reiterate, a system is only as secure as you make it. That includes external firewall and secured router devices.
I'm not sure about your ISP, but my ISP provides a firewall as part of the router. So I'm already as secure as my ISP wants me to be, which is usually allow outbound connections, deny incoming connections. So, do I need another firewall on top of that? I don't think so. But every layer of security makes you stronger.I will install an extra soft firewall and tweak it as much as needed!
For my home setup i just wanted to know if an external firewall would improve security more and be justified...