Brave

Why do you use a different browser just for porn?

Because I feel like it.

That's dumb. Its user agent is pretty generic, it doesn't even state that you are using Brave but Chrome.
You don't need to enable that meme token if you don't want to.
It only track you if you use its shitty defaults but I don't use that meme token, webrtc, js nor autoplay anything. A lot of those things are a pain in the ass to block with chrome or simply you can't.

Attached: 1537021984172.png (576x699, 286K)

wasn't brave supposed to pay you for ads that websites have? When I decided to try it some months ago it wasn't implemented

Attached: b90b70b.jpg (809x1011, 152K)

there are only two: Brendan Rich himself concerning the investors and the source code itself you mongoloid sperg

Alright, after half an hour. Should I wait another two for any links as well?

please be trolling. you idiot are aware that those objects are not the only thing that can be used to fingerprint you? easiest example is the div width/height which will make you 1 in 1 billion net users just by using Brave. and the fact that brave does disguise itself as chrome is even worse since the enumeration order of javascript Apis is entirely different meaning any site will instantly know whether you are actually chrome or just trying to impersonate chrome.

Also Firefox is the only browser available that can stop tracking. ignore the tor uplift but no browser on this planet can containerize tabs. this with proper settings literally makes Firefox impossible to follow. also ff is way faster. I have around 2k tAbs open runes fluently. meanwhile chrome shirts itself after couple hundreds

>I have around 2k tAbs open runes fluently
What the fuck? Why?

how much in denial can you be? this guy got over 30 million dollars from investors what do you think how he gonna pay it back by providing a "free" browser. brave hasn't said anything but the most likely path is that they obviously just hijack all ads and trackers and sell your data. pretty much what chrome does just even more toxic and gay

So you tell me that looking at the source isn't a valid source or you can't find the link without me giving it to you? and you tell me you can't look up on public internetwhat eich said how brave wants to make money? he literally admitted himself over and over that he wants to hijack ads to return the 30million investors money you faggot in denial.

if you care about privacy you use Firefox. if you don't you use chrome. it's as simple.

>width/height
It spoof your max resolution.
>fact that brave does disguise itself as chrome is even worse
First you complain to be unique, and now you complain that it is spoofing itself as the most common browser...
>since the enumeration order of javascript Apis is entirely different meaning any site will instantly know whether you are actually chrome or just trying to impersonate chrome.
>Running javascript.
>Also Firefox is the only browser available that can stop tracking. ignore the tor uplift but no browser on this planet can containerize tabs.
>What are the brave sessions?
You are the only on trolling here. Have you even tried the browser before complaining? I agree before that a ((well)) configured memefox is better but Brave is a lot superior to chrome.

Attached: 1537020173143.jpg (512x476, 18K)

>So you tell me that looking at the source isn't a valid source
Jesus Christ... What exactly is problematic in the source code? You haven't even bothered to tell anyone that. Why are you pretending to be dense?

>and the fact that brave does disguise itself as chrome is even worse since the enumeration order of javascript Apis is entirely different meaning any site will instantly know whether you are actually chrome or just trying to impersonate chrome.
you do know that brave is just a chromium fork, right?

Why is the Fate franchise such a clusterfuck?

You do know that this is incorrect?
Brave initially was based off of their fork of Electron (which in itself behaves differently than Chrome, the Browser).

Current Brave is based off of their own libchromiumcontent fork which again behaves differently than Chrome.

All those behaviour differences can be caught through JavaScript.

I am saying this in order for you to understand that Brave tries to spoof 1% of entropy values that provide your fingerprint but leaves the rest 99% unchanged making you stand out heavily.

>It spoof your max resolution.
I specifically said "div width/height". I was the guy posting this in the issue tracker of Brave and I tried it out after every commit they made to address it and with every commit they embarassed themselves more.
The only browser that can spoof DOM element width/height (properly) is Firefox.

>First you complain to be unique, and now you complain that it is spoofing itself as the most common browser...
If a Browser that calls itself Brave but doesn't behave like Brave doesn't that make you unique you idiot?

>You are the only on trolling here. Have you even tried the browser before complaining? I agree before that a ((well)) configured memefox is better but Brave is a lot superior to chrome.

It is not superior to Chrome.
Chrome gives all your data to Google ok. But it is a nightmare to fingerprint properly for non-Google instances.

Brave on the other hand is easy af for every party to fingerprint (try it out, with commercial fingerprinters, there are open source samples). This means by using Brave you give your data to Google, to Brendan Eich (and his "angel investors") and on top of that to the external trackers that can now easils fingerprint you because you use a Browser that has like 0.1% Userbase total.

If you enable javascript every browser is easily fingerprinted, as is your OS and hardware and everything else. CSS also has some leaks. Don't do that.

>this with proper settings literally makes Firefox impossible to follow. also ff is way faster.

Attached: 1537038676699.png (252x291, 37K)

>if you care about privacy you use Firefox

Attached: 1536697077234.png (430x441, 101K)

Wrong. Firefox with JavaScript and CSS on can spoof everything. The only thing you can't spoof is your TCP fingerprint, which is onyl relevant if you are on Linux in which case you can just spin up a VM with Windows and use it as your "VPN".

Though I agree with you generally people should disable JavaScript. There literally is no need to use it anywhere since you can just watch videos with youtube-dl.

The CSS leaks are also fixed by Firefox. Also Media Queries, the already visited shit and even CSS Font fingerprinting are fixed in Firefox. Say thanks Tor Uplift.

Anyone using Chrome,Chromium,Brave,Vivaldi or anything even remotely based on Blink should just go choke themselves.

PLEASE suggest a good browser then...

Chrome is a botnet, Firefox sucks, Brave sucks according to you...

Let us have a notarized bet about 1000$ whether Firefox can be (in under 15 minutes) made literally invincible to Tracking/Fingerprinting/Ads.

Fyi I am getting payed. Though not to shill Firefox but to actually set it up for Clients that want privacy.

Software can't spoof everything because it is software. You can spoof a lot of things that are sent out to servers but if they have javascript they can write their own tests for things inside your own browser which can then also call home.

>Firefox sucks

So how do you idiot get to this conclusion?
Firefox targets the mainstream idiots yes. Accordingly the default configuration isn't good yes. Does that stop you from changing the default config? Maybe if you are a brainlet.

I have sniffed Firefox Network traffic from another machine and literally there are no unrequested ocnnections anymore for example. Every website tells the same Fingerprint in all eternity since it is literally just the Tor fingerprint. No website can fingerprint since the height/width tricks are normalized among all properties.

And on top of that you can fake fonts from inside Firefox. Also Firefox has (semi) Grid View and Vertical Tabs.

my wife rin is so cute

>Firefox!
>Firefox!
>Firefox!

You sound like one of those mentally ill trannies that works for Mozilla.

Attached: 2015_0506_YMATEOFW_BioPhotos_JennaFischer_1455x1455_KO.jpg (1455x1455, 1.38M)

You come across as such an autistic faggot.

That is the exact point you idiot I am trying to make. In those Chrom* Forks you can spoof lots of things. But it doesn't matter because you will still be able to identify the user.

In Firefox you cannot. Literally every single property there is is spoofed while retaining the message that the Browser is a Firefox. And since it in reality is Firefox it will behave like it. There are no loopholes believe me we have tried this out more than enough. The only reason to think there are loopholes is if you are a Government/Google/Brave/Vivaldi shiller or you are simply retarded and can't try it out yourself.

As I said before: Commercial trackers are availible to test it yourself. But clearly setting up Firefox 15 minutes is clearly to ohard for most of Jow Forums appearently.

>Let's have a bet to prove whether I am right or wrong
>You come across as autistic

Good job proving who is correct.

Right so my post consisted of Firefox Firefox Firefox and not explanation as to how Firefox does actually stop fingerprinting right?

>If a Browser that calls itself Brave but doesn't behave like Brave doesn't that make you unique you idiot?
Do you even read what you type mongoloid? You're complaining about fingerprinting but yet want an unique user agent.
>Brave on the other hand is easy af for every party to fingerprint
But it's not. Have you read any of what I've written?
You just keep ignoring any statement and repeating the same nonsense.

Attached: 1537181545157.png (1240x1080, 1.02M)

Just waht is this thread.

I don't know whether OP is actually a Mozilla shill but reading this thread I am really becoming scared at how many Jow Forums people seem to use Blink Browser (Brave/Chrom*/Vivaldi)

I thought this was Jow Forums and not facebook or leddit

Firefox is made out of software retard. Software spoofing is purely superficial as long as they can execute code. Firefox has better configs though.

We are all waiting for gnu icecat

well blink/webkit was always going to take over as the only library for making browsers out of. Qutebrowser uses some variant of it.

OP is on the spectrum friend. He probably creeps underage insta thots too, judging by his rampant paranoia.

Do you even read what you type mongoloid? You're complaining about fingerprinting but yet want an unique user agent.

Now understand how many Brave users are on the world you idiot? 0.00001% of total. Firefox has 10%. And 100% of Firefox users have a Tor fingerprint. Now what is easier to blend in with?

That is the reason Brave has to change its fingerprint to look like Chrome but it cant since every semi comptenet website could easily see that it is a Brave faking being Chrome (like I said 2000 times before)

>But it's not. Have you read any of what I've written? You just keep ignoring any statement and repeating the same nonsense.

That is what you idiot are doing.

I told you before: Commercial trackers are availible online even as open source. Just go try it out and tell me how "Brave protects you from fingerprinting". Fucking idiot. YOu don't understand that Brave uses Blink? Blink does not have API to spoof many values you fucking idiots.

Just go check the div height/width issue in Brave repo. It is still reproducible even after them saying "we fixed it". And that is just one of the properties.

Let's all ignore Audio Fingerprinting, WebGL, HSTS, PNG tracking, eTags etc. etc.

Google itself has a list of all of those tracking methods (and those But it's not. Have you read any of what But it's not. Have you read any of what I've written?
You just keep ignoring any statement and repeating the same nonsense.I've written?
You just keep ignoring any statement and repeating the same nonsense.aren't even all addressed in Firefox) and out of 15 that Google points out Brave blocks like 2. Congratulations.

Wrong idiot. The tor uplift project implemented the spoofing directly into he Engine. YOu literally cannot bypass it or find out someone is faking those values since they are the "original" ones.

except that it isn't, it just has a lot of spinoffs and alternate timelines. If the "main story" progression confuses you, I have some bad news for you

Attached: 433baec.jpg (632x1200, 128K)

There's no such thing as software spoofing when you can execute code. It doesn't matter how much you want to shill for it, its not real.

Honestly I agree with him. I dont know what this guy does but really setting up your Browser properly whether its real Firefox, or IceCat takes like 15 minutes. Though to be honest I wouldn't suggest the GNU Zillas anymore since they don't have all of the Tor code in them.

> And 100% of Firefox users have a Tor fingerprint. Now what is easier to blend in with?

I guess you wanted to say that 100% of Tor users have a (Tor/) Firefox fingerprint?

You must be mentally retarded?
IT IS NOT SPOOFING ANYTHING IN FIREFOX THAT IS THE LITERAL POINT. THE ENGINE ITSELF SETS THOSE VALUES THOSE VALUES ARE LITERALLY REAL. You don't even need any plugins or addons or anything to be completely anonymous since this functionality is built in into the Engine of Firefox you mongoloid. The thing you are point out is the sole reason no Chrom*/Brave/QuteBrowser/Vivaldi will ever be able to fake anything.

>The thing you are point out is the sole reason no Chrom*/Brave/QuteBrowser/Vivaldi will ever be able to fake anything.
How about an example of this? Surely you could test one browser out of those through Panopticlick. Not the same person by the way.

The engine is literally incapable of spoofing anything if it is software. This is timing attacks 101 shit. Now if they go through and modify all their javascript code to be constant time and slow everything down that will still be fingerprintable on its own.

I watched Fate just because for Rin. I love her. Though I if Saber joins both of them are allowed. Only condition is that Rin has to wear her Stay Night outift. Anything else and she can leave the room.

And for the tenth time: IT IS NOT SPOOFING THE ENGINE SETS THOSE VALUES AS REAL VALUES DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?

Simple example pseudo code:

int width = 0;
if(privacy.resistFingerprinting)
width=1000;
else
width=(screen.width);

THIS IS THE C/RUST CODE THAT DOES THIS. TELL ME PLEASE HOW JAVASCRIPT WANTS TO ACCESS ANYTHING RUNNING INSIDE OF THE ENGINE. I am sure if you had something like this you wouldn't be sitting at Jow Forums sperging out but rather work with the NSA and get 5.000$ per week.

Are you dumb?
You are aware what a Browse Engine is?
Blink specifically does not allow you to spoof anything. Obviously since it is by Google why hurt their own buisness model.
Vivaldi/Brave/QuoteBrowser are all based on blink. So if you spoof values inside of those Browser every semi comptent website will be able to tell since you spoofed thoe values with just JavaScript inside the context of the Webpage.

If you do it with Firefox though no website can tell since the Engine submits the "spoofed" values as "real" values. This means the B rowser doesn't even get any of the "real, old" data but only the "new, fake" data to work with from the beginning. Firefox itself doesn't even know the values are faked nor can any site since the Engine (The backend C/Rust code) does this.

>Panopticlick
Also we found the reason why this thread is so dumb. If you think panopticlick is the epidemy of Fingerprinting I am not surprised you idiots are using Brave. Panopticlick checks like 5 of 100000 values. And it even checks them in very obvious badly ways. I said 10000 times go try commercial fingerprinters then come back tell me how "Brave" did.

What do you understand about this not being a software issue? Software (The Engine) cannot fix this.

Holy fuck we now have actual banks shilling on Jow Forums.

What don't you understand about this being a software issue? If every Browser in the world would transmit the exact same fingerprint (and assuming all Browsers on the planet used Firefox Container) the only reasonable way for websites to differentiate between users would be the Network Fingerprinting. Meaning you could only divide people by their OS.

Holy motherfucking fuck of projections. What's with these assumptions? I asked you one question, Jesus...

Lurking this thread. Please elaborate. Why would a Bank shill against Brave?

OP is a autistic pedophile. Hence his great concern with privacy.

If every browser in the world transmitted the exact same fingerprint but then also allowed everyone to run code in such a way as to test that fingerprint they would all be identifiable. This is not a software issue. Javascript is harmful.

>One question
Stop "I was pretending to be retarded hurr why so mad"

According to your logic Tor is flawed. Literally the NSA showed us though the only way to uncover Tor users is side-channel attacks or dumb users. Give me your counter arguments you intellectual.

Just play the VN

You just prove you never used Firefox in your life.

Go try out Firefox with the Tor uplift code and try to execute any JavaScript that might fingerprint you. Go look at the result and be ashamed of yourself trying to shill against Firefox and for Brave.

By any chance are you Brendan Eich or one of his cocksuckers? If so go tell them to suck harder. Just because this fat gay faggot gets 30 million as investor money doesn't mean he can try to shill for a product worse than Google Chrome.

Tor with arbitrary javascript execution (the TorBrowser default) is very unsafe. It's patched to hell to slow it down and almost everyone's already using a single browser so there's not much fingerprinting available but there's still shit like Spectre/meltdown attacks via javascript that were real for 10+ years. Completely unsafe at any speed.

I think we need a patch. OP keeps rapidly spawning and is fucking up the thread.

Attached: 1536696374495.png (1000x1000, 148K)

Are you a male, and getting on in years?

>Stop "I was pretending to be retarded hurr why so mad"
Stop pretending you know who you were replying to. There are 20 people here. Also, what is your great alternative to all this?

Right so let me recap. My question was "go try it out then come back and tell me"
Your resposne was:

>is very unsafe

Good job proving my point. You are just one of Brendan Eichs cocksuckers.

Tor is not patched down to hell nor is it slowed down. The exact same patches that Tor uses are in the live version of Firefox and even if you enable them it doesn not slow down anything. You just prove you don't know how the Tor uplift even works. Hint: It just disables all timing APIs. That is why I said try to find any JavaScript that lets you be fingerprinted with the uplift. You can't.

> almost everyone's already using a single browser so there's not much fingerprinting available

Becvause that isn't the case if everyone used Firefox with the Tor uplift right? Fucking mongoloid Brave cocksuckler. Post one more Brendan Eich cocksucking message.

> but there's still shit like Spectre/meltdown attacks via javascript that were real for 10+ years.

Yes it was a thing. I specifically said "except side-channel attacks or dumb users".
If you do something where Spectre/Meltdown might hurt you and you do this inside of your real Computer without a sandbox then it's your own fault. But I highly doubt you care about Spectre/meltdown since you are shilling for Brave.

>Completely unsafe at any speed.
Exactly. Brave is completely unsafe at any speed.

Rin is kinda annoying imo

Attached: saber.jpg (1920x1080, 76K)

On a personal level I'm annoyed that it's not that customisable anymore, but on a "people pay me to shove lots of data on the page" level it's much faster. Chrome has performance bugs and font bugs that they've been passing around bugs.chromium.org for years.

Things like this bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=461877

Also it renders badly, if you have lots of elements on the page it'll render cascade and lag everything on the OS.

She is but she is hot. I would die to see young Rin with adult Saber suck my cock.

>except that it isn't, it just has a lot of spinoffs and alternate timelines
The definition of a clusterfuck.

Hahaha yes! Kvetch some more!!!

Attached: klein-hila-image.jpg (300x300, 18K)

this, and stay away from GO

>Fuck this guy ruined all my arguments with well thought out properly proven answers what to do now?

>Hahaha I was only pretending to be retarded.

I never got how a Browser could allow a website to arbitrarly load any font. I remember libPNG having a huge vulneribility know assume the same happens with any font really. Just visiting a Website in Chrome/Brave/Vivaldi/Qutebrowser might be enough for the website to execute native code.

Tor is literally patched to slow down lots of javascript functions and reduce timing precision on others. Varying speed functions and extreme precision returns guarantee your shit is personally identifiable down to the actual hardware in your computer. With Tor uplift theres less risk but still potential risk because of all possible risks that exist. Just disable javascript always. If I was an EichShill I would not be attacking specifically javascript would I? Javascript is what is at fault, not any specific browser code (other than the JSVM). Now getting supreme fedora defensive against Brave sounds like you're some kind of Moz cockgobbler.

Timing attacks against browsers are real: don't use Javascript.

understandable, but a relationship with her would propably drive you crazy

Attached: saber5.jpg (1250x754, 53K)

Good to admit you don't even read my posts.
Good to admit you never used Tor nor Firefox (/at least properly).

The Tor code does not slow down Timing APIs. It just removes the READOUT API.
If there is no readout API a website can't even read the values regardless of what the timings are you idiot.

>Timing attacks against Chrom*-based Browsers are real: don't use Brave/Vivaldi/Qutebrowser/Chrome

I don't get how much of a Brave shill you can be. Did Brendan Eich pay you like 1 million or what? Or are you sucking his cock off while he forces you to wr ite this message while you are in tears?

>avascript is what is at fault,

I agree you fucking faggot but what do you wanna do for the normie? The normie certainly isn't going to disable JavaScript. So rather give them a Browser that has JavaScript enabled while greatly diminishing the probability of them getting followed (Imagine how much money trackers have to invest to develop new methods to track a Browser that is nearly untrackable).

>well thought out properly proven answers

Holy shit,you are mentally my dude. Can you not see how ridiculous you look? Probably not because of the spectrum I guess...

Attached: E6dhTT6.jpg (564x815, 114K)

Literally all of my real life female friends that were attractive (hint all) and with whom I had something more to do were as crazy and dumb as they were intelligent. Which was both a lot.

It slows down the functions, it reduces precision on timing. All browsers are vulnerable to everything, Tor browsers are slightly less vulnerable but still completely vulnerable.

It's impossible to save normies and thus everyone is identifiable by who they are not.

>This guy destroyed my pathetic childish attempt to shill for a failed product with well proven, properly sourced arguments

"hurr I was pretending to be retarded hurr"

Brave is for people that like to suck Brendan Eichs cock.

Jesus Christ. This is assburgers isn't it?

Attached: 1536327635417.png (1008x709, 715K)

>It slows down the functions, it reduces precision on timing.
I guess you mean the 10ms slowdown. Why do you care? If a Website despereately tries to do timing even with the Readout APIs disabled you know that Website is doing shady stuff while at the same time they won't be getting real values since the 10ms is randomized.

So you are the sole person in this whole thread to seem to have some kind of understanding. Please elaborate what Browser would you use. I am currently using Firefox with no JS and all the Tor uplift.

The problem is I don't know whether I should stay with the Tor Resolution (is it like 1000x900?) or set the Browser to 1366x768 or whatever it was since that is the most common screen resolution on the planet.

>Hurr look at me I was only pretending to be retarded

>Jesus Christ I am so cool naming some random guy from over 3000 years that copied old Jewish theology which itself copied old Zarathustran theology.

I improved your meme

Attached: npcs.png (1000x1000, 472K)

I'm using ESR with no JS/CSS by default and no Tor patches, I'd go for the 1366x768 but I don't see any good browser options.

You're so oblivious. This is delicious.

Attached: 1536523003059.png (651x757, 241K)

Is 28 enough?

None of this was true by the way. And no, it wasn't Firefox.

Attached: weq231cd.jpg (718x505, 63K)

So, now what OP?

Attached: sdawqe3.jpg (686x558, 38K)

how can you fingerprinter yourself?

based, redpilled, and checked

AmIUnique is one of the worst sites to do the checks. Go debug their Javascript. They take for example an Audio Fingerprint of you but don't reveal it to you.

Also fyi: Showing fake values or anything isn't good. Good is when you have the most common shit. Which is why Tor is so strong and why Firefox is the non-best Tor option.

>Hurr what is Judaism
>Hurr what is Zoroastrianism.

Isn't ESR now on 60. Why the hell no CSS? You can't get "a:visited" on Firefox since a year or so. Why don't you use the Tor patches? If you use Tor patches you can enable CSS. I assume you disabled CSS because of a:visisted/media queries etc. All of this is either natively blocked in Firefox or gets blocked with the Tor patches.

DC and Marvel universes and their reboots feel like a bigger clusterfuck to me.

>Hurr look at me acting like an idiot in public.
Congratulations you did not enable the Tor patches. You win the prize for most intelligent intellectual in Zimbabwe since 2004.

>Showing fake values or anything isn't good
Why? If I haven't told you, how could you have possibly known?
>Good is when you have the most common shit
User agent is nothing out of the ordinary (common), while not being accurate. How is it not good then?
>Which is why Tor is so strong
Haven't there been like a million published exploits and confirmed honeypots?
>Firefox is the non-best Tor option
With which extensions?
>Congratulations you did not enable the Tor patches. You win the prize for most intelligent intellectual in Zimbabwe since 2004.
What the fuck is wrong with you? I didn't enable Tor patches, because I said the test WASN'T done using Firefox. Jesus fuck... How about you do one now?

>Rin is kinda annoying imo
>She is but she is hot
Tsundere summarized.

>Why? If I haven't told you, how could you have possibly known?
Because it is obvious that those values are fake. And as said before spoofing values doesn't do anything since any Website can easily find that out.

>User agent is nothing out of the ordinary (common), while not being accurate. How is it not good then?
If you set the user agent to something else inside of non Firefox Browsers it will allow websites to check for the behaviour of your Browser and compare it to the expected behaviour of the version your Browser said it was.

>Haven't there been like a million published exploits and confirmed honeypots?
The NSA themselves said the only way to fuck Tor users are compromising Nodes (which has nothing to do with the Browser), Side-channel attacks (which can always be conducted against anything that somehow exists in the physical world) or dumb users (like most people on Jow Forums).

>With which extensions?
None. Just disable JS.

>How about you do one now?
Here you go. Keep in mind I have JS normally disabled. And also don't use AmIUnique again. They are more than certainly selling your data. ELse they would show you all the data they fingerprint but they don't (Audo Context).

Also keep in mind those "uniquness" tests are not very good since they compare you to other people that are privacy aware. You want to blend in into the masses not into a tech savvy group.

Attached: faggot.png (622x536, 70K)