15 ms·

Brave seems to pop up here every now and then. With its past history of scammy behaviour (https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-lin

Brave seems to pop up here every now and then. With its past history of scammy behaviour (https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-links-crypto-privacy-ceo-apology https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff...) and how they collect money without actually promising to give it to people that they claim to act opn behalf of, its not a browser anyone should trust. There are so many better alternatives to brave for those that want to donate to content creators or just browse the web. I have never understood the fascination or usefulness of brave. I would caution people against using it.

offby37years 6y ago
Still more trustworthy than the mainstream alternatives (Google, Mozilla, Apple or Microsoft).
- jfk13 6y ago
  I don't think it's helpful to group Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft together like this, as though they were all "of a kind". There are some very different business models and priorities among them.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - userbinator 6y ago
    They're all essentially controlled by Google to some extent, from the perspective of "web standards" churning... but then, so is Brave.
- dkdbejwi383 6y ago
  I find Safari good enough. Slow to support new APIs maybe, but it's perfectly serviceable for a daily driver. What's your issue with it?
  - lmedinas 6y ago
    Safari is good, my dealbreak is the adblockers. Ive been using Safari since 2 months im already desperate to use Firefox, Chrome or even give Brave a try. And no, none of the available adblocker for Safari works well.
  - stopChanging 6y ago
    I'm torn, to be honest. I like keychain, it makes Safari the only browser with password management I trust. Browser dev history has been littered with poor implementations. I want to say Chrome still stores shit unencrypted, but this is just what I recall off the top of my head from reading tech news. I'm no expert, and that's pretty much my point. I trust keychain and don't want to write a phd thesis on how secure the other options are. I like the ios integration. Other browsers offer this, but it's just another account to worry about - do i trust this company, will they still be around (and still be trustworthy) in ten years? browser history is the most personal thing I do on a computer so this matters a lot to me. (I guess both of these points are just tldr walled garden) The lack of good adblocking kills it for me. It's too much of a sacrifice, even with a pihole running at home. Also, as you said, they move slowly. Not just with shiny new tech, but also basic privacy things like if I type "old.reddit.com/r/embarrassingThingsImInto" or whatever, why are they still defaulting to http, and waiting for the web server to decide to upgrade the connection (leaking the initial request)? Why is defaulting to https hidden away in the developer menu? Developers are the only people these days who should be dealing with http anyway, and in those cases there's probably a ".local" at the end they could use to make a determination.
- nobunaga 6y ago
  To be honest, thats a claim that you have not proven. If anything, Firefox and safari are probably more trustworthy based on my own subjective opinion. They have never injected affiliate links or promised to do things which are borderline scam-like behaviour. I personally treat all software with a level of distrust. But brave has done things which all point to a certain behaviour in which people should think twice before using the product. You can get the benefits of privacy that Brave touts from other browsers. If you want to donate to content creators, plenty of ways to do so as well.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    BS. Do a Google search on Firefox. The querystring has an identifier for Firefox. It's no different than what happened with Brave, except that Brave acknowledged it was bug behavior and that the identifier is only for the browser, not user data. As for ways to donate to content creators, please do tell: is there any solution out there that let us be rewarded by getting privacy-preserving ads and to contribute the proceeds further to other people?
    - LawnGnome 6y ago
      Having a source identifier in a query string isn't remotely the same thing as hijacking links or injecting content into a page.
      - rglullis 6y ago
        The ads are via notifications. There has NEVER been link hijacking or content injecting on a page, what are you smoking?
        LawnGnome 6y ago
        Link hijacking: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... Content injection: https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto-reddit-and-other-sites-3/91188 https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto...
- anxrn 6y ago
  One of these is not like the others. I would genuinely like to understand why I should not trust Mozilla.
StephenSmith 6y ago
What alternative do you suggest? I'm using firefox and wondering if I should look at something else.
- nobunaga 6y ago
  De-Google Chromium, Firefox with the right extensions installed, Safari if you like the walled garden and apple ecosystem Im sure there are more but all the bells and whistles Brave touts you can get elsewhere and you are not using a product from a company that has shady practices
beefee 6y ago
It's a matter of preference and threat models. Brave isn't perfect, and has had some controversy in their business practices. They also have some telemetry and cryptocurrency ads. For non-technical users I still think Brave is the best overall bet, especially on mobile devices. There's a great privacy comparison linked in a different thread. For more technical people, ungoogled-chromium [1] is probably the cleanest option. It's completely free from ads, telemetry, "pings", "experiments", and the like. [1] https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium
- curiousgal 6y ago
  I am fairly technical and I prefer Brave because of the anti-fingerprinting.
  - Tanath 6y ago
    If you want to avoid fingerprinting you should use tor-browser. And using a chromium-based browser over tor makes you more fingerprintable, not less.
  - fsflover 6y ago
    What does https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ show for Brave?
    - curiousgal 6y ago
      Here you go https://i.imgur.com/RJpoIGu.png https://i.imgur.com/RJpoIGu.png
      - 0-_-0 6y ago
        That's better than with Firefox, where I get a unique fingerprint
  - jonathansampson 6y ago
    More specifically, Brave's clever use of "farbling" is one really neat element of the anti-fingerprinting logic. After all, if a browser just blocks access to certain APIs, that blocking itself could be enough to fingerprint a user. We instead farble the results of certain APIs: https://brave.com/privacy-updates-4/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates-4/
jraph 6y ago
> Brave seems to pop up here every now and then Yes. "Oh, another unwarranted mention of Brave!" Isn't Hacker News a website on things that gratifies own's curiosity? How does an article about how to get started with a browser that isn't new is supposed to fulfill this requirement? By making us ask ourselves these questions? These mentions which just look like ads need comments like yours at the top of the post. It's not even hard! The presentation of a new version with interesting new features would fit the bill.
john-shaffer 6y ago
> how they collect money without actually promising to give it to people that they claim to act opn behalf of This has not been the case for a long time. Any effective solution in this space is going to be controversial. Brave is far from perfect, but it is much better than allowing Apple or Google to control your browser and doesn't require any tech expertise to use. Those companies generally don't apologize or revert their scummy practices.
- freewilly1040 6y ago
  It seems Brave is often combatting some bad pattern on the web by replacing it with something worse. The latest affiliate link controversy was from 2020 [1] Weird ad browser notifications is not that old [2] Probably others. Happy to be wrong, I haven't researched it much, but what exactly is the case that they have a good track record of any significant length? [1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-links-crypto-privacy-ceo-apology https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff... [2] https://community.brave.com/t/turning-off-brave-notifications/88620 https://community.brave.com/t/turning-off-brave-notification...
  - matthewrobertso 6y ago
    [1] is the exact same link linked to by OP and is not convincingly an issue [2] is about an opt-in system that is easily disabled if accidentally opted into
  - john-shaffer 6y ago
    You have to explicitly find and enable the ad notifications. It can actually be a bit of a PITA to enable. It's not even supported on my phone. The purpose is if you want to support websites, but don't want to spend money. The ad revenue goes in a wallet, and you decide who to disburse it to (they do have to be registered as a Creator -- Brave's system is subject to KYC laws). The revenue is small and not worth the notifications, so transferring funds to your wallet is generally a much better option. That thread looks like someone had a device with ads explicitly enabled. Perhaps someone else set it up, or he just forgot about it. That happens all the time with software. The case is that most of the bad press is inaccurate and overblown, and Brave has changed course when needed. Their track record is imperfect, but far better than the mainstream alternatives. I don't have sources other than that I've been using Brave as my primary browser on all devices.
ashleshbiradar 6y ago
What’s wrong with it’s creator contributions thing?
- nobunaga 6y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999 https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/1076474814708310016 https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/107647481470831001... Are some examples.
  - jonathansampson 6y ago
    Addressed numerous times in this post already, but (in summary) those were BAT grants given to Brave users from Brave itself, for the purpose of allowing those users to earmark tokens for certain creators. During a couple days in December, 2018, our UI/UX received a few major changes in response to tremendous user feedback. As a result, Brave tipping system is many times better today. More details: https://brave.com/rewards-update/ https://brave.com/rewards-update/
chappi42 6y ago
Normally I use Firefox, but as it didn't run well on SailfishX/Android, an alternative was needed. Tried Brave, adapted some settings and this browser runs very well, I can recommend it. And, at least for me, Brave is very useful!
jonathansampson 6y ago
There is no "scammy" behavior in our past. What you're linking to here is an affiliate link offering from pre-search UI in the browser. This involved no user data, no privacy impact, etc. See the official response here (with screenshots, so as to clarify how the feature actually worked): https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/. If an affiliate link offering (shown plainly, and prior to any navigation event) worries you, wait until you see what other browsers are getting away with. If you're using Chrome, Edge, or Firefox, your browser serves as an out-of-the-box keylogger, sending each keystroke off to Google (Chrome and Firefox) or Bing (Edge) as you type into the address bar. Even an unintentional pasting of sensitive information gets transmitted.
- nobunaga 6y ago
  What other browser has injected a referrer to a link that has been entered into a browser URL bar and has benefited the company personally? As a engineer that has worked on global products myself, I find it extremely concerning that something like that made it to the public and it seems quite unbelievable that it was a simple mistake, but then again, I wasn't the person who coded it. There has been plenty of 'mistakes' that brave has needed to backtrack on and apologise for. Other browsers that have been around longer than brave have not been found to behave in ways brave has even though I am sure many researchers poke holes in it. If you would like to point out the behaviour of other browsers and compare it to the controversies that Brave has had, feel free to do so and prove many of the doubters wrong. The affiliate link is one of many examples. My other point is that you can also get the privacy protections Brave touts from other browsers as well, but without the shady past that Brave has a history of.
  - matthewrobertso 6y ago
    Can you link some other examples then? You keep using the affiliate link one but it doesn't seem very convincing to me. My takeaway from the comments on this post has been that some people really don't like brave but are either unwilling or unable to explain with more than surface-level criticisms.
christophilus 6y ago
Incidentally, I like the idea of the affiliate link behavior if it was opt-in. I'd opt into it, if it really provided some trickle of funding back to Brave. Brave is my favorite browser. It's the best web experience out of the box. No digging into settings to specify my default search engine (DuckDuckGo), ads are blocked by default without having to turn on extensions (which I see as an attack vector).
stopChanging 6y ago
I wish you wouldn't clutter up the comments with this spam. Make your argument once, do it well, and let us decide for ourselves.

offby37years 6y ago

Still more trustworthy than the mainstream alternatives (Google, Mozilla, Apple or Microsoft).

jfk13 6y ago
I don't think it's helpful to group Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft together like this, as though they were all "of a kind". There are some very different business models and priorities among them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- userbinator 6y ago
  They're all essentially controlled by Google to some extent, from the perspective of "web standards" churning... but then, so is Brave.
dkdbejwi383 6y ago
I find Safari good enough. Slow to support new APIs maybe, but it's perfectly serviceable for a daily driver. What's your issue with it?
- lmedinas 6y ago
  Safari is good, my dealbreak is the adblockers. Ive been using Safari since 2 months im already desperate to use Firefox, Chrome or even give Brave a try. And no, none of the available adblocker for Safari works well.
- stopChanging 6y ago
  I'm torn, to be honest. I like keychain, it makes Safari the only browser with password management I trust. Browser dev history has been littered with poor implementations. I want to say Chrome still stores shit unencrypted, but this is just what I recall off the top of my head from reading tech news. I'm no expert, and that's pretty much my point. I trust keychain and don't want to write a phd thesis on how secure the other options are. I like the ios integration. Other browsers offer this, but it's just another account to worry about - do i trust this company, will they still be around (and still be trustworthy) in ten years? browser history is the most personal thing I do on a computer so this matters a lot to me. (I guess both of these points are just tldr walled garden) The lack of good adblocking kills it for me. It's too much of a sacrifice, even with a pihole running at home. Also, as you said, they move slowly. Not just with shiny new tech, but also basic privacy things like if I type "old.reddit.com/r/embarrassingThingsImInto" or whatever, why are they still defaulting to http, and waiting for the web server to decide to upgrade the connection (leaking the initial request)? Why is defaulting to https hidden away in the developer menu? Developers are the only people these days who should be dealing with http anyway, and in those cases there's probably a ".local" at the end they could use to make a determination.
nobunaga 6y ago
To be honest, thats a claim that you have not proven. If anything, Firefox and safari are probably more trustworthy based on my own subjective opinion. They have never injected affiliate links or promised to do things which are borderline scam-like behaviour. I personally treat all software with a level of distrust. But brave has done things which all point to a certain behaviour in which people should think twice before using the product. You can get the benefits of privacy that Brave touts from other browsers. If you want to donate to content creators, plenty of ways to do so as well.
- rglullis 6y ago
  BS. Do a Google search on Firefox. The querystring has an identifier for Firefox. It's no different than what happened with Brave, except that Brave acknowledged it was bug behavior and that the identifier is only for the browser, not user data. As for ways to donate to content creators, please do tell: is there any solution out there that let us be rewarded by getting privacy-preserving ads and to contribute the proceeds further to other people?
  - LawnGnome 6y ago
    Having a source identifier in a query string isn't remotely the same thing as hijacking links or injecting content into a page.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      The ads are via notifications. There has NEVER been link hijacking or content injecting on a page, what are you smoking?
      - LawnGnome 6y ago
        Link hijacking: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... Content injection: https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto-reddit-and-other-sites-3/91188 https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto...
anxrn 6y ago
One of these is not like the others. I would genuinely like to understand why I should not trust Mozilla.

StephenSmith 6y ago

What alternative do you suggest? I'm using firefox and wondering if I should look at something else.

nobunaga 6y ago
De-Google Chromium, Firefox with the right extensions installed, Safari if you like the walled garden and apple ecosystem Im sure there are more but all the bells and whistles Brave touts you can get elsewhere and you are not using a product from a company that has shady practices

beefee 6y ago

It's a matter of preference and threat models. Brave isn't perfect, and has had some controversy in their business practices. They also have some telemetry and cryptocurrency ads. For non-technical users I still think Brave is the best overall bet, especially on mobile devices. There's a great privacy comparison linked in a different thread. For more technical people, ungoogled-chromium [1] is probably the cleanest option. It's completely free from ads, telemetry, "pings", "experiments", and the like. [1] https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium

curiousgal 6y ago
I am fairly technical and I prefer Brave because of the anti-fingerprinting.
- Tanath 6y ago
  If you want to avoid fingerprinting you should use tor-browser. And using a chromium-based browser over tor makes you more fingerprintable, not less.
- fsflover 6y ago
  What does https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ show for Brave?
  - curiousgal 6y ago
    Here you go https://i.imgur.com/RJpoIGu.png https://i.imgur.com/RJpoIGu.png
    - 0-_-0 6y ago
      That's better than with Firefox, where I get a unique fingerprint
- jonathansampson 6y ago
  More specifically, Brave's clever use of "farbling" is one really neat element of the anti-fingerprinting logic. After all, if a browser just blocks access to certain APIs, that blocking itself could be enough to fingerprint a user. We instead farble the results of certain APIs: https://brave.com/privacy-updates-4/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates-4/

jraph 6y ago

> Brave seems to pop up here every now and then Yes. "Oh, another unwarranted mention of Brave!" Isn't Hacker News a website on things that gratifies own's curiosity? How does an article about how to get started with a browser that isn't new is supposed to fulfill this requirement? By making us ask ourselves these questions? These mentions which just look like ads need comments like yours at the top of the post. It's not even hard! The presentation of a new version with interesting new features would fit the bill.

john-shaffer 6y ago

> how they collect money without actually promising to give it to people that they claim to act opn behalf of This has not been the case for a long time. Any effective solution in this space is going to be controversial. Brave is far from perfect, but it is much better than allowing Apple or Google to control your browser and doesn't require any tech expertise to use. Those companies generally don't apologize or revert their scummy practices.

freewilly1040 6y ago
It seems Brave is often combatting some bad pattern on the web by replacing it with something worse. The latest affiliate link controversy was from 2020 [1] Weird ad browser notifications is not that old [2] Probably others. Happy to be wrong, I haven't researched it much, but what exactly is the case that they have a good track record of any significant length? [1] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-links-crypto-privacy-ceo-apology https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff... [2] https://community.brave.com/t/turning-off-brave-notifications/88620 https://community.brave.com/t/turning-off-brave-notification...
- matthewrobertso 6y ago
  [1] is the exact same link linked to by OP and is not convincingly an issue [2] is about an opt-in system that is easily disabled if accidentally opted into
- john-shaffer 6y ago
  You have to explicitly find and enable the ad notifications. It can actually be a bit of a PITA to enable. It's not even supported on my phone. The purpose is if you want to support websites, but don't want to spend money. The ad revenue goes in a wallet, and you decide who to disburse it to (they do have to be registered as a Creator -- Brave's system is subject to KYC laws). The revenue is small and not worth the notifications, so transferring funds to your wallet is generally a much better option. That thread looks like someone had a device with ads explicitly enabled. Perhaps someone else set it up, or he just forgot about it. That happens all the time with software. The case is that most of the bad press is inaccurate and overblown, and Brave has changed course when needed. Their track record is imperfect, but far better than the mainstream alternatives. I don't have sources other than that I've been using Brave as my primary browser on all devices.

ashleshbiradar 6y ago

What’s wrong with it’s creator contributions thing?

nobunaga 6y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999 https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/1076474814708310016 https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/107647481470831001... Are some examples.
- jonathansampson 6y ago
  Addressed numerous times in this post already, but (in summary) those were BAT grants given to Brave users from Brave itself, for the purpose of allowing those users to earmark tokens for certain creators. During a couple days in December, 2018, our UI/UX received a few major changes in response to tremendous user feedback. As a result, Brave tipping system is many times better today. More details: https://brave.com/rewards-update/ https://brave.com/rewards-update/

chappi42 6y ago

Normally I use Firefox, but as it didn't run well on SailfishX/Android, an alternative was needed. Tried Brave, adapted some settings and this browser runs very well, I can recommend it. And, at least for me, Brave is very useful!

jonathansampson 6y ago

There is no "scammy" behavior in our past. What you're linking to here is an affiliate link offering from pre-search UI in the browser. This involved no user data, no privacy impact, etc. See the official response here (with screenshots, so as to clarify how the feature actually worked): https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/. If an affiliate link offering (shown plainly, and prior to any navigation event) worries you, wait until you see what other browsers are getting away with. If you're using Chrome, Edge, or Firefox, your browser serves as an out-of-the-box keylogger, sending each keystroke off to Google (Chrome and Firefox) or Bing (Edge) as you type into the address bar. Even an unintentional pasting of sensitive information gets transmitted.

nobunaga 6y ago
What other browser has injected a referrer to a link that has been entered into a browser URL bar and has benefited the company personally? As a engineer that has worked on global products myself, I find it extremely concerning that something like that made it to the public and it seems quite unbelievable that it was a simple mistake, but then again, I wasn't the person who coded it. There has been plenty of 'mistakes' that brave has needed to backtrack on and apologise for. Other browsers that have been around longer than brave have not been found to behave in ways brave has even though I am sure many researchers poke holes in it. If you would like to point out the behaviour of other browsers and compare it to the controversies that Brave has had, feel free to do so and prove many of the doubters wrong. The affiliate link is one of many examples. My other point is that you can also get the privacy protections Brave touts from other browsers as well, but without the shady past that Brave has a history of.
- matthewrobertso 6y ago
  Can you link some other examples then? You keep using the affiliate link one but it doesn't seem very convincing to me. My takeaway from the comments on this post has been that some people really don't like brave but are either unwilling or unable to explain with more than surface-level criticisms.

christophilus 6y ago

Incidentally, I like the idea of the affiliate link behavior if it was opt-in. I'd opt into it, if it really provided some trickle of funding back to Brave. Brave is my favorite browser. It's the best web experience out of the box. No digging into settings to specify my default search engine (DuckDuckGo), ads are blocked by default without having to turn on extensions (which I see as an attack vector).

stopChanging 6y ago

I wish you wouldn't clutter up the comments with this spam. Make your argument once, do it well, and let us decide for ourselves.