Submitted 16 hours ago by Beep@lemmus.org to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2026/03/firefox-adding-a-free-vpn
Firefox’s free VPN will offer 50 gigabytes of monthly data, which is pretty generous for a browser-based VPN. A Mozilla account is required to make use of it, which isn’t a hardship (they’re free), but is a point of friction some may wish to know upfront.
Please stop adding bloat to my browser. I have nothing against VPN, but it’s not a fucking core feature of a web browser. Put that stuff in an extension that I can install if I want.
They should make a “Firefox Core” which contains only the browser with basic features, and then make another version which contains all the “fun” stuff.
They need to separate gecko properly so we can build things using just the renderer.
It depends on the country you are living in. There are plenty of people with restricted and surveilled internet.
Sure, but do you think they’re going to allow Firefox if it comes with a built-in VPN?
Arguable
Firefox’s free VPN won’t be using Mullvad’s infra though; it’s hosted on Mozilla servers around the world (if beta testing of the feature done in late 2025 tracks).
…oh.
How long before that data gets sold?
-1 year
If anyone missed them removing the “we will never sell your data” from their promise to their users, thus is clearly their next step in monetizing their users.
So they know it’s you all the traffic comes from?
Exactly. No thanks. Nothing is ever “free”.
“Free” as you pay with your data?
No, Mozilla uses Mullvad as a partner, they’re a serious and nolog VPN provider.
It doesn’t seem like it. As the linked OMG Ubuntu article speculates, probably the main benefit financially is making users more likely to sign up to their paid VPN.
Aside: Based on their blog post it seems like it’s a proxy rather than a VPN.
with a 50GB quota, I actually believe it’s free
Yep!
to google most likely.
Firefox ftw. Thanks firefox for making my surfing great.
I don’t trust mozilla though.
For everyone who thinks this is just gonna be a way for them to somehow sell your data, I don’t think so.
Think about it like this. You can buy a VPN plan for as little as $2 a month or less depending on the provider if you have a long-term commitment (e.g. 1-2 years). That pricing includes margin.
Firefox can essentially operate at lower prices than that, because they:
I would bet this would probably cost Mozilla less than a dollar per user per month, and that’s also assuming all those users are continuing to use the VPN service over time, maxing out their data limit, but refusing to pay for anything else after.
Meanwhile, Mozilla conveniently sells their own VPN service provided through Mullvad, which they make a profit on.
If a user cares enough to continue using the VPN because they want a VPN, they’ll blow through the data limit and be more inclined than the average user to pay for Mozilla’s option.
If a user doesn’t care enough to continue using the VPN because they were just trying it out, but they chose to use Firefox because it had a free VPN bundled in, which sold them on it over another browser, Mozilla just paid less than an ad would cost for a conversion.
And at the end of the day, it also just helps keep up their reputation as a browser that respects your privacy, which makes it easier to promote the browser elsewhere, in ads or otherwise.
This feels more like a marketing ploy that’s likely to just save money on ad conversions for new Firefox users, and increase Mozilla VPN conversions, rather than something they’re gonna use to super secretly siphon off your data and sell it to advertisers.
I think it would be better to compare this offer to well-known VPN providers instead of all VPN providers, since the sketchiest ones tend to have the lowest prices. The two reputable ones I can think of, Proton and Mullvad, both cost over $5/month. But cost is only half of the picture: They’ve also earned their reputation through a lot of time, effort, audits, even government raids.
Regardless, you have some good points. Let’s take for granted that Mozilla will not attempt to share or sell user data with this free service, that it’s all above-board (a fair assumption): They still have to build their reputation from zero.
Get out of here with your level headed take. The pitchforks already have been distributed and it has been decided Mozilla will sell the data asap! /s
Then why are then not offering at least a low cost subscription? Why are they spending money on infrastructure and support but getting no revenue in return?
Either they are okay with losing even more money, OR they plan to enshittify.
For this and many many other reasons, it’s time to switch to a privacy fork like LibreWolf or WaterFox
Why are they spending money on infrastructure and support but getting no revenue in return?
I already addressed this in my comment. If you want me to expand on how they most definitely can make money from something like this, Mozilla:
If this feature brings in new users, they can get revenue from any of these 3 sources, especially the sponsored listings. If this feature is just a benefit for existing users that might have already changed all their defaults and disabled sponsored content, it increases the chance of VPN conversions and donations, and increases the likelihood someone will recommend Firefox to a friend.
Either they are okay with losing even more money, OR they plan to enshittify.
Or they’re trying to get and retain users, which helps them make money from existing revenue options without having to make anything worse, while also providing a beneficial feature. I’m not saying there’s no chance they’ll enshittify, but I don’t think unconditional pessimism is the right move here.
For this and many many other reasons, it’s time to switch to a privacy fork like LibreWolf or WaterFox
I can’t speak to Waterfox myself, but I would agree with saying LibreWolf is a good idea if you care.
I just personally haven’t bothered switching since Firefox currently works fine for me, and anything they’ve done I dislike is fairly easy to just disable in settings and never see again.
Make a crypto wallet add on. Make a VPN with crypto payment channel settled once a week. Charge fair price of 2-5 cents per GB.
Alternarively use probabilistic payments but that’s bit of inconsistent for the end user
Make a crypto wallet add on. Make a VPN with crypto payment channel settled once a week.
Go use brave if you want to use a crypto trash browser
*crapto
This announcement comes suspiciously close to the announcement of them including a lot more AI bullshit.
How far Firefox has fallen. This is really sad to see.
Yeah, but they also added an AI feature that’s enabled by default that I never asked for.
And I normally advocate for Firefox. It’s been a good solid privacy focused browser for a while but now I’m starting to think maybe not as much.
Still better than the Chrome-alikes, but all the same I’ve switched to Librewolf. Problem is, foss mozilla teams like Librewolf are small and underfunded, and their ability to continue sanitizing the app forever is not garaunteed. A new vanguard FOSS browser project is needed.
Absolutely
There is the ladybird alpha is schedueled for 2026. Hopefully that has a beneficial impact.
How is it better than something like Vivaldi
Just use Mullvad then instead of this roundabout way of using Mullvad.
ofc, this is a free alternative, not a mullvad competitor
“Just use Mullvad instead” is good advice compared to almost any other option.
Unfortunate that to get this experience in Firefox, we will have to disable a built-in feature and download some extension.
This isn’t using Mullvad.
Interesting. I’d actually pay for an in browser VPN, it’s handy to be able to switch countries on the fly. Ideally even per browser tab.
I would not however pay for Mozilla’s mullvad thing. I don’t like mullvad since they dropped port forwarding and OpenVPN. I use proton now for that. But in the browser is a different usecase for me.
It’s just weird that it’s not possible to pay for this but only for the thing I don’t want.
I keep hearing about people dropping Mullvad for port forwarding…why do y’all need port forwarding while trying to stay anonymous?
AFAIK torrent. But I’ve been torrenting all my life without port forward and I have all the seasons from my favorite Linux distros,.
Torrents, you can’t peer with other people behind NAT.
The free option is limited to a certain amount of GB. Mozilla can upsell an unlimited version in the future. Likely the reason they don’t do that right from the start, is that their VPN network is completely new and it’s hard to judge the network capacity needed.
Great… so now workplaces will have to default-block Firefox to lock down their networks.
Company managed settings
Yeah… #doubt
blackbeans@lemmy.zip 8 hours ago
Usable addition, and the fact that it is only in-browser is actually a merit in some cases. Firefox gets a lot of hate but is way more privacy centric out of the box compared to Chrome. AI is only opt-in and you can literally customize the entire browser using about:config. Mozilla also maintains the only real competing web engine (not considering Apple’s locked in ecosystem) and they are the reason browsers are open source these days.
timroerstroem@feddit.dk 6 hours ago
Not to take anything away from your overall point, which I completely agree with, but this may be a bit of a stretch. All of the “AI” buttons and features are - to my knowledge - on by default. They have made it a lot easier to change that to “off by default now and in the future”, which is very welcome, but “only opt-in” is, again, a bit of a stretch.