Camoufox vs Chrome
Purpose
Compare the two browser-automation options for Hermes’s browser tool.
At a glance
| Camoufox | Chrome | |
|---|---|---|
| In use on this install | Yes — configured cloud_provider | No evidence found |
| Config | browser.camofox.managed_persistence: true (note: key is spelled camofox in config, not camoufox) | n/a |
| Driver | cua-driver v0.9.0 at /home/hermes/.cua-driver/packages/releases/0.9.0-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/cua-driver | n/a |
| Display | Headed, via Xvfb :99 + fluxbox — see headless-server | n/a |
use_gateway | false | n/a |
Detail
Camoufox (in use)
- Verified:
browser.cloud_provider: camofox,inactivity_timeout: 120s,allow_private_urls: true. - Runs headed under Xvfb rather than a true headless mode, per headless-server — fluxbox provides the window manager, x11vnc/noVNC expose it for human viewing.
cua-driverbridges Hermes’s computer-use tool calls to the browser.
Chrome (not found in use)
- No
google-chrome,chromium, or CDP-only launch flags found in the sanitized config or running process list during this audit. - Included in the comparison because the page existed as a placeholder — if Chrome/CDP was evaluated and rejected, that reasoning isn’t captured anywhere; worth a index entry if anyone remembers why Camoufox was chosen over stock Chrome.
Verdict
This install uses Camoufox exclusively. There’s no evidence Chrome/Chromium was ever wired in as an alternative on this host — the comparison exists more as a placeholder for a decision that may have been made outside this wiki than as an active either/or choice today.