In general use there shouldn't be much difference, but the problem would be how to deal with cases where you need to fallback to HTTP. I don't know how "HTTPS Everywhere" works when it comes to identifying issues where a website doesn't support a secure connection or if there as issues otherwise.

In HTTPS Everywhere you can probably create an allow exception for specific domains while Firefox only offers to access the main website via HTTP and may have a problem if only some resources like images or JS/CSS files need to be retrieved via HTTP, but the main website is working.

Thank's for your help

All incident from November 04, 2020 to December 19, 2020. Find, fix incident, resolve, build them and update automatically

All incident from November 04, 2020 to December 19, 2020. Find, fix incident, resolve, build them and update automatically

Can anyone with more technical privacy/add-on experience chime in on this? With Firefox offering 'HTTPS Only' baked right into it's Options now, is the popular and recommended 'HTTPS Everywhere' add-on still necessary?

Does it provide any enhanced functionality over Firefox's built-in option? Thank you.

I think that the main difference is about dealing with websites that do not support HTTPS or contain content the needs to be retrieved via HTTP.

See " Questions and Caveats":

• https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere

With Firefox HTTPS-Only this is not possible easily and you may have to disable this feature for serious cases. With the HTTPS Everywhere extension you can probably created rules (exception) to have as much HTTPS protection as possible, so if you encounter/visit a lot of websites that require workarounds for HTTP content then using the extension might be a better choice as Firefox HTTPS-Only is all or nothing and the extension allows more fine tuning.