Comments on Firefox contained in Flatpak vs Snap comparison

Be civil and read the entire article first. This is not a support forum. Comments from new contributors are moderated. English only.

Leave a comment

Required. Optional. E.g. your homepage, Twitter. or Email required unless anonymous. Not published or shared. Reuse to be recognized as the same commenter.
Plain-text only. Begin lines with a > character to quote.


With Ubuntu now shipping Firefox Snap as the default, would you consider releasing an updated article on the security and privacy of Snap vs Flatpak versions?


Using LM 21.1, I tried flatpak Firefox and it worked very well, but the downside was that I couldn't resolve LAN DNS (I believe this is down to the sand-boxing) so I tried the snap Firefox and that seems to work equally and in addition, I can now access LAN DNS. I'd tend to go with the flatpak version as I really do love security, but I use LAN DNS to access local devices several times per day and it was just too much of a hassle to lose it, so I'll stick with the snap variant. :-)

Linux user

I am using snap version of firefox and have been looking at firefox on flathub and I have noticed the flathub version is 1 version behind for last week which makes me think it is not updated as quickly as snap is and and I'm not sure why since other flatpaks seem to be more up to date then some snaps. I have never used fedora so i can not commit on that version. I have both snaps and flatpaks and like them over deb on ubuntu since its easier to stay updated on alot of programs and I now avoid other options, On a n100 fanless mini pc with 16gb of ram everything is fast regardless of what I use. I also use brave and perfer the snap version since the flatpak version has more warnings about being safe then other flatpaks. Snaps and flatpaks is all I use for software now since it will make upgrading easier is future..

Discussions also happens elsewhere! Read and participate in 4 external discussions (138 comments).