If a lot of non-Mullvad users use it, it will create a nice pool of people with at least the same browser fingerprint.
Basically, it seems like a good choice if you are already a Mullvad user and your threat model does not require the use of a Tor browser. However, if there's a significant non-Mullvad user base using it, it won't do much, as you'll just stand out as the only person using the Mullvad browser without Mullvad VPN.
The people you are looking to to regulate it are the same people who would exploit it.
I also think this approach of expecting the general public to adopt a borked browser to give deniability to people using it strategically is extremely naive. Human psychology just doesn't work like that, you might as well ask schools of fish to swim differently to hinder shark learning. To be frank, this seems like it will just create confusion vs telling people to use Tor browser.
The way to improve privacy is to provide a tool that actively enhances something incredibly well, and does everything else at least as well. If all browsers are hopelessly compromised, make something that isn't based on HTML and builds cool user interfaces directly from API calls like a videogame UI, for example.
Can you say more about the API calls, what would that be exposing of the user? I think it's difficult since most new apps are using Electron, or V8 scaffolds... but really nice idea
> However, if there's a significant non-Mullvad user base using it, it won't do much, as you'll just stand out as the only person using the Mullvad browser without Mullvad VPN.
Basically, it seems like a good choice if you are already a Mullvad user and your threat model does not require the use of a Tor browser. However, if there's a significant non-Mullvad user base using it, it won't do much, as you'll just stand out as the only person using the Mullvad browser without Mullvad VPN.