It's High now
Other urls found in this thread:
spyware.neocities.org
itsfoss.com
ghacks.net
support.mozilla.org
ghacks.net
warosu.org
twitter.com
What's with this anti-Brave propaganda lately? It reminds me of the anti-Flatpak propaganda a while back. Someone is clearly trying to push an agenda here. Worried about Brave's increasing popularity? Haven't people seen the explanations from Brave's CEO, explaining how it's not actually tracking and how they're changing it anyway in response to feedback? This is just a non issue.
reminder that the guy running spyware@neocities is a loon who thinks there are cia niggers in http
is there any better source? ive been looking for one for a long time
When a product advertisers itself as privacy product but then not only fails at its promised values (their fingerprinting protection non ironically makes it easier to be fingerprinted) but also actively does harmful stuff (injecting http headers of not just Sth like Mozilla.org but of coinbase) it should become instantly obvious that this is just a desperate attempt by Brendan to milk some money from easy infleuncable pseudo tech teens.
Brave themselves state in their manuals (very much at the end) that you should refrain from using Brave for privacy if "your life depends on it but instead use Tor [i.e. Firefox]" which essentially just means they are clearly aware Brave cannot does not and will not ever provide privacy.
>inb4 just use muh furryfox
Firefox has built-in telemetry. This can to some extent be disabled by the user, through the micromanagement of dozens upon dozens of about:config and user.js values.
Firefox is also notorious for slipping in stuff behind users' backs. Never forget this.
itsfoss.com
ghacks.net
It would seem that Moz://a doesn't have any concept of 'opt-in'. If they're willing to do this shit without telling users, what makes you think they won't silently revert your config changes and pass it off as one of their 'experiments'? Long story short, Firefox is botnet.
The only sane choices at this point are Icecat and Tor Browser.
Maybe he's onto something.
Well? Is he wrong?
Stop the copy pasta. Tor is a sane choice yes but Icecat (and any other Fork, Patch that isn't tor or Firefox) is legitimately harmful since all of those alter functionality that a website can deduce through javascript making you easier to track.
The best and most private Browser apart from Tor is stock Firefox with like 10 about:config flags toggled including resistFingerprinting and firstparty.isolate.
goto Mozilla wiki and look for "How to disable Firefox from.making automated requests "
As soon as you toggle all those flags Firefox will never ever automatically make network requests you didn't ask it for. I sniffed the traffic and checked the source.
It is only brainlets complaining about Firefox. Justifiably becAuse brainlets are brainlets and will stay brainlets.
People shill and bash it left and right. You're delusional if you think it's not just a bunch of shitposters trying to piss off the other side.
imagine making money of a product you didn't built and your entire marketing point is bashing the company that built that product
Brave is the most disgusting junk tech company currrently, nothing comes close to it except DuckDuckGo
In a future version of the browser, the company intends to adopt a pay-to-surf business model.
that would be an amazing option to have but i just dont think brave is trustworthy enough
Stop with the jewishness. As expected, the by the numbers response is something along the lines of 'b-but fingerprinting!' Yes. It's a thing. And how do you fucking psyops suggest we deal with it? Decreasing your protections elsewhere of course!! Why bother disabling all of the (((telemetry))), aka spyware? Just do like 10 little things to stock Firefox, which is toootally good enough to disable all of its tracking shit.
Got any other good suggestions while you're at it? How about switching to Google Chrome for MAXIMUM FINGERPRINTING PROTECTION?!? It's in your best interest, goy!
Enough.
I love Firefox man. You want to share your about: config changes you feel are most necessary?
source?
>The only sane choices at this point are Icecat and Tor Browser.
What about Epiphany?
Doesn't have uBlock Origin.
You do realise he is a paranoid anti-vaxxer right?
Based Eich.
Wow, you really got the ol' braincells firing.
So what? It does have ad blocking built in, and you can add the same filter lists. Why does it have to be uBlock Origin specifically?
I don't understand your post. HTTP is well known security issue. Thats why people have moved to HTTPS.
Your comment sounds like falseflag to give legitimacy to . Which has no legitimacy.
Mozilla trannies are still mad at him.
zoomer who just likes to say nigger. you have no idea what you are even talking about.
Brave Tor does not anonymize you. If you go to sites, they can still determine your OS, unlike with Tor Browser.
It's not about eavesdropping.
>Well?
WELL???
CIA niggers are in everything though, they're literally in your TV.
Fucking retard lmao
Brave is spyware. There is just so much weird shady shit going on and every thread gets derailed as soon as someone points it out. It's no different to the challenger space shuttle hoax. The evidence is right there but no-one wants to look into it so they just ignore it instead.
I'm stupid. What do and mean? Is Brave really compromised.
Because brave is legit shit and a scam. It doesn't have anti-fingerprinting like it promises.
I'm looking it now, seems like I've done it sometime in the past 6 months (when I installed my current OS) and didn't even remember doing.
support.mozilla.org
I'm actually putting some things back to true.
>they can still determine your OS, unlike with Tor Browser.
They can detect your OS with Tor as well retard.
What evidence?
the only agenda that's being pushed here is the daily and constant shilling for this scam of a company via its paid indian influencers
No they can't. It shows up as Windows regardless of what you actually use.
no, but the stunning and brave retards in this thread are trying to defend their meme malware
>Fuck Firefox
>Uses a Chromium-based browser instead
It's not like there's anything else. Edge is proprietary and is going to become Chromium-based anyway, and [insert loonix webkitgtk/qtwebengine browser] is too barebones and doesn't have any capacity for privacy/tracking protection besides occasionally a very basic adblocker.
What's wrong with GNOME Web's ad blocker?
Firefox is a fine browser m8. Stop using Chromium.
Ungoogled Chromium is acceptable
No. Stop supporting Google's monopoly. Stop using Chromium all together. Firefox is the only thing standing between Chrome and total market ownership
Chromium is still open source, I don't really see a problem with having one browser engine being dominant, assuming attention is paid to the fact that botnetless variations of it exist. Sorosfox is not a solution.
>I don't really see a problem with having one browser engine being dominant
There is literally nothing wrong with free software having a monopoly.
Do tell, what is the problem? The web is supposed to be standardized. All modern web engines are based on KHTML, yet I don't see you sperging out about KDE having a monopoly.
It just shouldn't be Google. Why would you ever want an advertising company designing standards for the web? This V3 Manifest shit that's threatening uBlock should already be plenty of warning that this isn't a rabbit hole we want to go down.
t. desperately trying to justify running Chrome
I'm desperately trying to find a reason against it really. Blink is the fastest and best-supported browser engine as of right now. Ungoogled Chromium is free from botnet, far more so than Firefox even, as the botnet features get patched out before compiling. It just seems like the ideal browser to me.
This was always coming. On the surface, Brave looks like a simple privacy-focused de-Googled Chromium fork with a built-in ad-blocker. Underneath, it's a fucking VC-backed ICO with long term plans to reinstate ads, but also extorting publishers out of 45% of their ad revenue (and obviously 100% for publishers who don't want to adopt their meme currency.) They plan to use targeted ads as well, which is impossible without tracking. If you didn't expect to see scummy money-grubbing behaviour sooner or later, especially with VC pressure to make a revenue stream, you're an idiot. It's also disappointing to see Eich throw away Mozilla's ideals for an open and interoperable web by making yet another Chromium fork.
Google are the sole largest contributers to Chromium. They literally define its entire direction, and by supporting them, you're supporting their dominence on the web. They can still implement negative changes in Chromium (which they are presently doing, see ghacks.net
I literally do not understand not at least running Firefox or a fork. It's honestly just intentional ignorance at this point. If "de-botnetting" is so important, run a Firefox fork. Christ man.
REMINDER: BRAVE SHILLS ARE SHITPOSTING ON Jow Forums.
REMINDER: ANTI-BRAVE SHILLS ARE SHITPOSTING ON Jow Forums.
1 rupee has been deposited into your account
from Cuckzilla Sorosfox Foundation.
>All modern web engines are based on KHTML
Yes, based on (although how much those forks and forks of forks developed since then is a different story). That doesn't mean KHTML has a monopoly. Only Konqueror is directly based on KHTML (at least it's the only one I can think of). Blink on the other hand has a user market share of - what? 80%?
The problem with only one dominant browser engine is Google's freedom to dictate the development of the future web. If Google wants to push a feature with Blink, what are devs supposed to do (could be devs of Blink based browsers or web devs)? Ignore it? Then you'll be left behind. Just look how much influence Google already has because of their popular services. Even Microsoft gave up on competing with Blink because of it.
Competition in the end always benefits the end user. It motivates all participants to out-do their competitors, unless they want to lose market share and more important gives everyone the freedom of choice.
It's free software so if people thought Google was doing a bad job, they could fork it.
Not an argument. Also, I use Firefox.
>All modern web engines are based on KHTML
This is obviously false, you idiot. Firefox and Edge (for now) are not based on KHTML. Only in the future you want, where every browser is a Chromium fork (except maybe Safari,) is every browser based on KHTML. That future sucks.
Chromium is pretty much Google's little bitch by now. You can fork it but you'd have to gut it to fix the shit that Google is going to do to it.
Fully featured browser engines (so not counting smaller ones like NetSurf's) are very large projects and need constant maintenance to ensure security.
You are delusional if you think a small team can just fork and maintain it without at least depending heavily on patches to the original engine.
>muh soros
Looks like Brave shills are sperging out of desperation
>desperation
But you're the one solving captchas for 1 rupee per post. Stop projecting, Rajeesh.
I don't side with the Brave shills. Brave is a botnet and they're too stupid to hide it. If anyone here is suggesting it unironically, seriously consider suicide. However, I don't think Firefox is a good alternative to the Bravenet.
The actual likelihood that you're arguing with a legit shill is probably extremely low, especially considering how low fucking priority Jow Forums is for a browser company with VERY limited advertising funds.
You're both fucking retarded
>It's free software so if people thought Google was doing a bad job, they could fork it.
This is wrong and dumb, which would be obvious if you knew the first thing about software development or computer security. Web browsers are huge projects, almost bigger than operating systems. You can't _just_ fork a browser these days unless you have a team of full-time software developers to maintain your changes, as well as a security team to audit those changes and patch zero-days. This is why all the Chromium forks are shallow forks that only change the front-end and leave the renderer 100% untouched. They all rely on Google for the actual web browser bits because the Chrome team are one of only three software development teams in the would capable of maintaining a web browser. Even fucking Microsoft, who has money to burn, is not capable of maintaining a web browser. This gives Google undue power in the web standardisation process. So if you think they're introducing too many poorly designed web standards that are bad for fingerprinting, favour integration with other Google products, or just entrench Chrome's dominance further by making the web platform more complicated and harder to implement, that's though shit because Chrome is an effective monopoly.
I use brave coupled with duck duck go because they respect my freedom and privacy.
Also its FIERY fast! everybody should go check it out.
Cope
So, is Brave good or not?
Sincere question coming through:
If i use Brave with 1.1.1.1 DNS and VPN, with DDG as my browser, am i still vulnerable to the threats mentioned in OPs link?
it's almost the same comment in every Brave thread, don't you paid shills ever get tired? I mean at least try to change the comment
>DDG as my browser
I meant search engine, obv.
Don't worry, with Brave + DDG you are 100% safe.
you can change your os with modifying your user-agent, so that's not a new thing
Notch used to post on /v/ about minecraft before it exploded in popularity. So tech companies are going to be aware of Jow Forums.
It's no longer in "better than firefox" tier. I'd say they're about the same in terms of scumminess now.
That's what Brave, Vivaldi, Ungoogled, etc do to Chromium.
First, I think it's certainly possible for a web engine to be maintained by a small team considering that KHTML received major updates until 2016. Second, free software isn't only developed by small teams. A company such as Red Hat, SUSE, Canonical, or others could fork Chromium.
That's firefox fags on defense mode, truth is almost anything is better than Chrome/Firefox now apart from IE. Brave/Vivaldi are certainly better and modern but still have glaring issues.
Ungoogled Chromium and GNU Icecat are what you want to use if you want to have peace of mind
Prove Brave has shills retard.
Of the tiny amount of browsers I've tested have the similar results. He is too way to lenient with firefox though. If you read the page about firefox it says "Was NOT able to find a way to disable this, even in about:config." but he above its not spyware after mitigation. How can you say you can't disable this certain tracking/spying and then say it's not spyware.
ooh good catch. Firefox is DEFINITELY not trustworthy at all. what said is right. The only way to make FF safe is through modifications made at the source code level made by people with a particular level of autism such as GNU
>Brave/Vivaldi are certainly better
lol
This is a VIRUS link! Don't click it!
>The only way to make FF safe is through modifications made at the source code level made by people with a particular level of autism such as GNU
I'm glad that my browser (Brave) comes fully secure and locked down OOTB.
Yeah, and Gecko doesn't exist because only Google is capable of maintaining a browser engine.
The whole point of this discussion is that Gecko is slowly dying and whether or not that's a good thing.
Yes, one engine and everything will be equally supported.
When Mozilla uses it the only valid reason I see why people would complain about it is because they don't trust Mozilla to use it securely, they could submit code a have a larger impact than they do with their own engine. They've been trying to get everyone on the same engine and have the same standards implemented for a long time. Here's the chance, unless they were lying the entire time about their goals.
I didn't say that you dope. There are three (3) software development teams in the world capable of maintaining and securing a web browser engine. One team (Safari's) isn't very good, so we really have two: Chrome's team and Mozilla's. This isn't a good situation, but at least there's two. Web browsers like Brave don't help the situation because their developers are not competent enough to maintain their own engine (they shouldn't feel bad about this though, since there are only 2/3 teams of developers that are.) If everyone switches from Firefox to Chromium forks like Brave, it's likely that in the future, there will only be one team of developers who can maintain a browser engine, which is very bad because it lets one company (Google) dictate the nature of the web platform.
Browsers based on Chromium like Brave are part of the problem. Browsers based on alternative web engines like Gecko, QtWebKit and (maybe in future) Servo are part of the solution, but if we let these browser engines die now, they'll probably never come back, because the web platform will only get more stupidly complicated in the future and it would require too much time, money and effort to bring an older browser engine up to date.
There are two possible situations.
>FF switches to Blink and uses it as Google provides it
Now Google basically has a monopoly (unless we're talking about Apple products) and is free to push new standards as they want.
>Mozilla forks Blink
So we're back to Mozilla vs. Google in the browser engine market and have a situation like now (which you seem to have a problem with).
You are imagining an utopian future, where a monopoly will unite the free market. That's not what happens in real life.
>they could submit code a have a larger impact than they do with their own engine
They would have zero impact when it comes to Blink's future. Google decides where to go. Mozilla would do the grunt work.
>Agent tells the server that it uses webkit for rendering and that it uses openssl
>SPYWARE LEVEL: MEDIUM
What an actual retard
Sir please do the needful
Provide proof Rajesh
>Someone who believes challenger was faked also believes brave is "spyware"
I didn't even flinch senpai.
nothing wrong with paranoia
Nice poisoning the well, faggot
>thinking flatpaks are a good idea
Just go back to fucking windows. Geez.
Is there an exchange where I can short BAT? I want to do my part to send this ponzi straight to zero.
>Ah... Here, we can see a modboi trying to take down the majestic based deerfag...
>But what the modboi doesn't know is that the based deerfag has built up an immunity to their tranquilizers through years of heavy opiate abuse...
>And there he goes... Off to find another unbanned VPN.
>He lives to uwu ... another day...
so which browser do i use on android now
what browser is that