4 ms·

> To my understanding there is no data sent from my Brave client to any Brave servers. That would be wrong. By Brave's own confession, there are 70 requests it

> To my understanding there is no data sent from my Brave client to any Brave servers. That would be wrong. By Brave's own confession, there are 70 requests it sends "home" on startup [1]. Regardless of request payload, each of them contains your PII (IP address at the very least). There is plenty of opportunity for your data to be stored and used (not saying that it is). If and how is that data actually used, we do not know, because this part is closed-source. When companies that are running advertising-based business models like Brave and Google are in question, this is the most important part users should be concerned with. Only way to settle this would be if the browser actually sent no requests anywhere, like you initially believed to be true. Indeed, a web browser has no business making requests anywhere without my explicit approval! > It’s possible to know that by looking at the code for Chrome. Brave doesn’t do this and it’s possible to know that by looking at the code for Brave. Do not want to be harsh but I assume you didn't actually look into the Brave's source code. You could have, but in reality very few actually do. Open-source "tag" on software can give this false sense of security because you rely on someone else to do the hard work and actually look through millions of lines of code. The only way to actually trust a browser from a privacy standpoint is to check if it is indeed not transmitting any data. Instead of relying on source code, a much easier and foolproof way to check this is to use a network proxy, many are commonly available for all platforms. Then you can believe your own eyes vs marketing. Disclaimer: I am in the business of creating a privacy respecting, zero-telemetry, browser. This topic is near and dear to my heart. More on this here [2] and here [3] [1] https://brave.com/popular-browsers-first-run/ https://brave.com/popular-browsers-first-run/ [2] https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#ossprivacy https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#ossprivacy [3] https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#privacy https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#privacy

prepend 5y ago
> Do not want to be harsh but I assume you didn't actually look into the Brave's source code. This is a weird assumption to make on HN. I have. I also didn’t say that viewing source code is the only part of understanding a browser’s security. It’s a useful portion. Network monitors are also good. I’m not talking about startup telemetry, I mean browsing history and activity. Chrome reports this, Brave doesn’t. I don’t think Brave is perfect, I just think it’s better than Chrome and Firefox.
- freediver 5y ago
  Point taken. Since someone from Brave jumped in, I gave my (long) opinion on the topic as a reply to their comment.
jonathansampson 5y ago
> By Brave's own confession, there are 70 requests it sends "home" on startup… "Confession" is a curious choice of words. You're correct that Brave issues requests on startup; this is necessary for a secure application. If your browser isn't updating its internal list of suspected-malicious domains and more, it isn't doing "security" properly. > There is plenty of opportunity for your data to be stored and used (not saying that it is). To what "data" are you referring? You cited my review of our (Brave) network activity, and that of many other browsers; which data/requests do you find to be worrisome? A similar review was conducted in 2020 by Trinity College Dublin, which also found Brave to be the "most private" browser tested (even with these startup requests): https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf. > …each of them [network requests] contains your PII (IP address at the very least). An IP address is rather unavoidable. But whether or not an IP address constitutes PII is debatable—many users can (and do) share common IP addresses. That said, we drop the IP address when and where possible. For example, usage requests are routed through a CDN which replaces the user's IP address with their inferred country. Brave has no interest in trying to remotely monitor anybody's browsing habits; if we did, you (and/or those who actively monitor our project, looking for faults) would see clear signals in our network activity. Instead, everything we do is designed from the outset to preclude this type of abuse. That's the case with our Privacy-Preserving Product Analytics (https://brave.com/p3a https://brave.com/p3a), our Private CDN (https://brave.com/brave-private-cdn/ https://brave.com/brave-private-cdn/), and more. Brave isn't interested in your personal information; we have built a business model that doesn't rely on the harvesting of user data. > The only way to actually trust a browser from a privacy standpoint is to check if it is indeed not transmitting any data. This is a great point. Please review our network requests, and let me know which items give you concern. We're genuinely interested in your feedback. > Disclaimer: I am in the business of creating a privacy respecting, zero-telemetry, browser. This topic is near and dear to my heart. I'm curious how your product handles security; do you not maintain a client-side list of suspected-malicious domains (so that you can warn a user who might be stumbling into something harmful), or check for updates to patch zero-day vulnerabilities in the wild, etc.? Both of these (and more) require routine network requests if they are to offer any effective defense for the user.
- 5y ago
jonathansampson 5y ago
I was going to download your browser (from https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/), but I realized 1) There is no Windows option, and 2) It requires me to submit a great deal of information via a Google Form before I can download. Honestly, this is not what I expected from the "privacy respecting, zero-telemetry, browser" that you've been heralding here. The Google Form alone is far more alarming than Brave's P3A (which is not connected to any Google Account, doesn't feed the data to a third-party, restricts user answers to category/range values, breaks up and temporally offsets delivery of feedback to prevent fingerprinting, etc.).
- freediver 5y ago
  1) We are not developing for Windows yet, just Mac. Small startup, we have to focus our strengths. And we are slightly more bullish on macOS than Windows. 2) Perhaps you missed that we are in beta. You are opting-in your email in exchange for being invited to become a beta tester. You do not need to do that. And if you do, we are going to use your email only to send you the invite. And the reason why there are so many questions in the form is that we want to deter as many people as we can, and get only the most determined beta testers. If somebody finds a 10 question form intimidating, their value to us as an active, contributing beta tester is likely to be small. When we are out of beta you will be able to download the browser without submitting anything, and enjoy a zero-telemetry browser out of the box. Makes sense?
  - jonathansampson 5y ago
    Bullish on macOS? Windows isn't going away anytime soon. My apologies if I am misunderstanding what was meant by "bullish" in this context. It does strike me as odd (given your tone here) that you would be requiring users to submit their email address, and answer [a Google-hosted] questionnaire, in order to use your application. "…we want to deter as many people as we can [from using the browser at this time]" (brackets contain my own words) doesn't seem like a great pitch; why not let everybody test the software, and invite (from within the app) users to share their feedback after a day/week of use?

prepend 5y ago

> Do not want to be harsh but I assume you didn't actually look into the Brave's source code. This is a weird assumption to make on HN. I have. I also didn’t say that viewing source code is the only part of understanding a browser’s security. It’s a useful portion. Network monitors are also good. I’m not talking about startup telemetry, I mean browsing history and activity. Chrome reports this, Brave doesn’t. I don’t think Brave is perfect, I just think it’s better than Chrome and Firefox.

freediver 5y ago
Point taken. Since someone from Brave jumped in, I gave my (long) opinion on the topic as a reply to their comment.

jonathansampson 5y ago

> By Brave's own confession, there are 70 requests it sends "home" on startup… "Confession" is a curious choice of words. You're correct that Brave issues requests on startup; this is necessary for a secure application. If your browser isn't updating its internal list of suspected-malicious domains and more, it isn't doing "security" properly. > There is plenty of opportunity for your data to be stored and used (not saying that it is). To what "data" are you referring? You cited my review of our (Brave) network activity, and that of many other browsers; which data/requests do you find to be worrisome? A similar review was conducted in 2020 by Trinity College Dublin, which also found Brave to be the "most private" browser tested (even with these startup requests): https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf. > …each of them [network requests] contains your PII (IP address at the very least). An IP address is rather unavoidable. But whether or not an IP address constitutes PII is debatable—many users can (and do) share common IP addresses. That said, we drop the IP address when and where possible. For example, usage requests are routed through a CDN which replaces the user's IP address with their inferred country. Brave has no interest in trying to remotely monitor anybody's browsing habits; if we did, you (and/or those who actively monitor our project, looking for faults) would see clear signals in our network activity. Instead, everything we do is designed from the outset to preclude this type of abuse. That's the case with our Privacy-Preserving Product Analytics (https://brave.com/p3a https://brave.com/p3a), our Private CDN (https://brave.com/brave-private-cdn/ https://brave.com/brave-private-cdn/), and more. Brave isn't interested in your personal information; we have built a business model that doesn't rely on the harvesting of user data. > The only way to actually trust a browser from a privacy standpoint is to check if it is indeed not transmitting any data. This is a great point. Please review our network requests, and let me know which items give you concern. We're genuinely interested in your feedback. > Disclaimer: I am in the business of creating a privacy respecting, zero-telemetry, browser. This topic is near and dear to my heart. I'm curious how your product handles security; do you not maintain a client-side list of suspected-malicious domains (so that you can warn a user who might be stumbling into something harmful), or check for updates to patch zero-day vulnerabilities in the wild, etc.? Both of these (and more) require routine network requests if they are to offer any effective defense for the user.

5y ago

jonathansampson 5y ago

I was going to download your browser (from https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/), but I realized 1) There is no Windows option, and 2) It requires me to submit a great deal of information via a Google Form before I can download. Honestly, this is not what I expected from the "privacy respecting, zero-telemetry, browser" that you've been heralding here. The Google Form alone is far more alarming than Brave's P3A (which is not connected to any Google Account, doesn't feed the data to a third-party, restricts user answers to category/range values, breaks up and temporally offsets delivery of feedback to prevent fingerprinting, etc.).

freediver 5y ago
1) We are not developing for Windows yet, just Mac. Small startup, we have to focus our strengths. And we are slightly more bullish on macOS than Windows. 2) Perhaps you missed that we are in beta. You are opting-in your email in exchange for being invited to become a beta tester. You do not need to do that. And if you do, we are going to use your email only to send you the invite. And the reason why there are so many questions in the form is that we want to deter as many people as we can, and get only the most determined beta testers. If somebody finds a 10 question form intimidating, their value to us as an active, contributing beta tester is likely to be small. When we are out of beta you will be able to download the browser without submitting anything, and enjoy a zero-telemetry browser out of the box. Makes sense?
- jonathansampson 5y ago
  Bullish on macOS? Windows isn't going away anytime soon. My apologies if I am misunderstanding what was meant by "bullish" in this context. It does strike me as odd (given your tone here) that you would be requiring users to submit their email address, and answer [a Google-hosted] questionnaire, in order to use your application. "…we want to deter as many people as we can [from using the browser at this time]" (brackets contain my own words) doesn't seem like a great pitch; why not let everybody test the software, and invite (from within the app) users to share their feedback after a day/week of use?