4 ms·

Right, the browser catalogs everything you do and sends it to Brave to share with their advertisers. I've got it.

rglullis 5y ago
No, you didn't get it at all. There is no activity logging and there is no "sharing". No one can prove who is the owner of the device that got the ad confirmation. No one can point at you after seeing an ad. All that is known is that advertiser X needs to pay for the confirmation Y. You don't need to reveal anything about yourself to be able to prove you have the confirmation. That's the whole point of double-blinded (or zero-knowledge) signatures. Stop misrepresenting everything about how the system works, you are being incredibly dishonest.
- annoyingnoob 5y ago
  Did you look at the links I provided in this thread? Maybe you missed this part as being 'out of scope' of their solution: "Brave collusion with CDN to track users based on IP" What happens when you click on a Brave ad and it takes you to an advertiser's landing page? That advertiser gets to learn all kinds of things about your browser. Brave's obfuscation only goes so far, and they know how to work-around their own solution. Trust them if you'd like but I don't. I don't need yet another chromium browser. Brave offers nothing that I cannot get elsewhere and includes an ad network. I think its Brave that is being dishonest, Brave cares about telling you a story and showing you ads, its marketing.
  - rglullis 5y ago
    You are really grasping at straws. The fact that they state that this is out of scope from the obfuscation technique does not mean the attack is practical. It means that they would have to be in collusion with the CDN in order to be able to get IP addresses. There are plenty of things to criticize about Brave, but what you are pointing out is a non-issue. You keep misrepresenting the information, I don't know if due to ignorance, bias or dishonesty. I want to believe it is only ignorance, because that is the easiest one to fix. Would you at least consider the possibility that you are assuming malice without any strong evidence?

No, you didn't get it at all. There is no activity logging and there is no "sharing". No one can prove who is the owner of the device that got the ad confirmation. No one can point at you after seeing an ad. All that is known is that advertiser X needs to pay for the confirmation Y. You don't need to reveal anything about yourself to be able to prove you have the confirmation. That's the whole point of double-blinded (or zero-knowledge) signatures. Stop misrepresenting everything about how the system works, you are being incredibly dishonest.

annoyingnoob 5y ago
Did you look at the links I provided in this thread? Maybe you missed this part as being 'out of scope' of their solution: "Brave collusion with CDN to track users based on IP" What happens when you click on a Brave ad and it takes you to an advertiser's landing page? That advertiser gets to learn all kinds of things about your browser. Brave's obfuscation only goes so far, and they know how to work-around their own solution. Trust them if you'd like but I don't. I don't need yet another chromium browser. Brave offers nothing that I cannot get elsewhere and includes an ad network. I think its Brave that is being dishonest, Brave cares about telling you a story and showing you ads, its marketing.
- rglullis 5y ago
  You are really grasping at straws. The fact that they state that this is out of scope from the obfuscation technique does not mean the attack is practical. It means that they would have to be in collusion with the CDN in order to be able to get IP addresses. There are plenty of things to criticize about Brave, but what you are pointing out is a non-issue. You keep misrepresenting the information, I don't know if due to ignorance, bias or dishonesty. I want to believe it is only ignorance, because that is the easiest one to fix. Would you at least consider the possibility that you are assuming malice without any strong evidence?