3 ms·

Since you mentioned privacy, Brave doesn't have first party isolation and Total Cookie Protection. Doesn't that bother you?

jqpabc123 4y ago
Mozilla derives almost all their income from privacy invaders. Every Firefox install is tagged with a unique ID. Firefox runs AMP pages through Google's servers. Doesn't that bother you?
- Yizahi 4y ago
  If on one hand we have a minuscule improvement of user privacy from atrocious to the atrocious+1%, and on the other hand we are talking about supporting two competing browsers vs. single browser monopoly... Well I'll take Firefox support every day. Even with all the dumb stuff Mozilla foundation does.
wooque 4y ago
https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ gives me unique fingerprint in Firefox but not in Brave according to https://privacytests.org/ https://privacytests.org/ Brave privacy is as good or even better than Firefox
- freediver 4y ago
  It should be noted that privacytests.org is ran by a Brave employee (IMO there should be better transparency and disclosure on the home page). As someone in the field (developing Orion browser) I can say that the tests do appear to be biased towards Brave features and do not include testing the most important browser privacy feature of them all, which is telemetry (Brave and most other browsers include a ton of telemetry by default). That is a shame because the idea of the site and its open source nature is good. We definetely need something like this, just operated by an independant entity to prevent any conflict of interest for something as important as the topic of privacy.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    We definetely need something like this, just operated by an independant entity I know, how about eff.org? You ignored the first part of his post which shows that Firefox by default doesn't fair particularly well on privacy in their tests either. Mozilla devotes more lip service to privacy than they do actual effort toward making it happen. A default install of Firefox allows most ads and trackers and can be easily fingerprinted. Is it reasonable to expect otherwise from a company that lives off privacy invaders?

jqpabc123 4y ago

Mozilla derives almost all their income from privacy invaders. Every Firefox install is tagged with a unique ID. Firefox runs AMP pages through Google's servers. Doesn't that bother you?

Yizahi 4y ago
If on one hand we have a minuscule improvement of user privacy from atrocious to the atrocious+1%, and on the other hand we are talking about supporting two competing browsers vs. single browser monopoly... Well I'll take Firefox support every day. Even with all the dumb stuff Mozilla foundation does.

wooque 4y ago

https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ gives me unique fingerprint in Firefox but not in Brave according to https://privacytests.org/ https://privacytests.org/ Brave privacy is as good or even better than Firefox

freediver 4y ago
It should be noted that privacytests.org is ran by a Brave employee (IMO there should be better transparency and disclosure on the home page). As someone in the field (developing Orion browser) I can say that the tests do appear to be biased towards Brave features and do not include testing the most important browser privacy feature of them all, which is telemetry (Brave and most other browsers include a ton of telemetry by default). That is a shame because the idea of the site and its open source nature is good. We definetely need something like this, just operated by an independant entity to prevent any conflict of interest for something as important as the topic of privacy.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  We definetely need something like this, just operated by an independant entity I know, how about eff.org? You ignored the first part of his post which shows that Firefox by default doesn't fair particularly well on privacy in their tests either. Mozilla devotes more lip service to privacy than they do actual effort toward making it happen. A default install of Firefox allows most ads and trackers and can be easily fingerprinted. Is it reasonable to expect otherwise from a company that lives off privacy invaders?