Brave Browser release info

silversurfer

Level 83
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Aug 17, 2014
7,266

Release Channel 1.33.106​

Full Release Notes
  • Added the ability to sign typed data (eth_signTypedData_v3 and eth_signTypedData_v4). (#18659)
  • Added default currency and default cryptocurrency settings in brave://settings/wallet. (#19234)
  • Added menu options to edit and remove networks under brave://settings/wallet/networks. (#19004 1)
  • Added rewards settings section under brave://settings/rewards. (#18158 3)
  • Added ability to update background images on the New Tab Page via component updates. (#19129)
  • Added a post uninstall survey on Windows. (#18063 1)
  • Added the ability to enable FileSystemAccess API via brave://flags/#file-system-access-api. (#18979 2)
  • [Security] Stripped referrer and origin in cross-origin requests from “.onion” origin as reported on HackerOne by kkarfalcon. (#18071)
  • [Security] Disabled CNAME uncloaking when a proxy extension with a SOCKS5 fallback is enabled as reported on HackerOne by neeythann. (#19070)
  • Implemented time-limited sync QR codes. (#19550 2)
  • Updated UI for the Brave Rewards widget on the New Tab Page. (#17483 1)
  • Updated certain error messages for Brave Rewards to display as modals under brave://rewards. (#16652 1)
  • Updated the default widget list under New Tab Page. (#19708)
  • Updated Brave to use “etc/brave/policies” on Linux. (#19052 1)
  • Removed known user tracking parameters “wbraid” and “gbraid” from certain URLs. (#18758)
  • Fixed rounding issues for send and swap values. (#19855)
  • Fixed values to show N/A instead of 0 if balances cannot be obtained. (#19404)
  • Fixed full fiat balance not being displayed with ERC721 tokens. (#19725)
  • Fixed being able to remove the active network under brave://settings/wallet/networks. (#19678)
  • Fixed the connect hardware screen not working for Trezor devices. (#19495)
  • Fixed double click on “Confirm/Sign” buttons for Trezor transactions closing the wallet panel. (#19490)
  • Fixed token balances not being displayed when USD balance cannot be shown. (#19407 1)
  • Fixed clicking “Solve” on adaptive CAPTCHA not working in certain cases. (#18858)
  • Fixed the inability to access the IPFS settings link on certain window sizes. (#19221 1)
  • Fixed not being able to go back on IPFS pages when automatic DNSLink redirection is enabled. (#16557)
  • Upgraded Chromium to 96.0.4664.110. (#20077) (Changelog for 96.0.4664.110 2)
 

Gandalf_The_Grey

Level 59
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Apr 24, 2016
4,824
Brave V1.34.80 (Jan 6, 2022)
  • Added the ability to make the tab audio icon non-clickable using brave://flags/#tab-audio-icon-interactive. (#19979)
  • Added indications for selected network. (#19651)
  • [Security] Disabled CNAME uncloaking when DoH is enabled with an HTTPS proxy. (#15038)
  • Updated error message text when Trezor is not connected. (#19351)
  • Updated legacy gas controls to allow 0 gas price. (#20103)
  • Updated price fetching to use contract address when possible. (#19574)
  • Updated Omaha installer version for Windows to v1.3.36.111. (#11904)
  • Removed “View on block explorer” button for rejected transactions. (#19454)
  • Removed text label for the private icon on Private Windows. (#13704)
  • Fixed crash when disabling Brave Shields in certain cases. (#19958)
  • Fixed inability to download torrents with WebTorrent. (#19818)
  • Fixed retry loop for token refill when server responds with 404 to adaptive CAPTCHA request. (#18859)
  • Fixed issue in hardware wallet connect screen while switching derivation scheme. (#20155)
  • Fixed error when importing Ledger accounts. (#19451)
  • Fixed Trezor popup incorrectly reopening in certain cases. (#19858)
  • Fixed plus icon for RPC URLs not being shown when editing a network. (#19717)
  • Fixed inability to remove previously entered RPC URLs. (#19782)
  • Fixed Dapp web compatibility issue with https://studio.manifold.xyz. (#20283)
  • Fixed issues with voting and creating spaces or proposals on https://snapshot.org Dapp. (#20282)
  • Fixed tooltip for unsupported networks on brave://wallet being retained on screen. (#19400)
  • Fixed path names not appearing in the address bar for IPNS addresses. (#18888)
  • Upgraded Chromium to 97.0.4692.71. (#20269) (Changelog for 97.0.4692.71)
 

silversurfer

Level 83
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Aug 17, 2014
7,266

Release Channel 1.34.81​

Full Release Notes
 

oldschool

Level 66
Thread author
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Mar 29, 2018
5,583

Desktop​

Release Notes V1.35.100 (Feb 2, 2022)​

  • Added “wallet_requestPermissions” and “wallet_getPermissions” for compatibility with https://market.x.immutable.com and others. (#19274)
  • Added web3 “currentProvider” shim for compatibility with both https://snowtrace.io and Trava Staking Program. (#20353)
  • Added “personal_ecRecover” signing for compatibility with https://loopring.io. (#19621)
  • Added “Add suggested tokens” panel into Brave Wallet. (#19819)
  • Added “Ethereum Site Permissions” UI into Brave Wallet. (#19954)
  • Added ability to modify current network under Brave Wallet. (#19917)
  • Added UI feedback when copying phrase from “Your recovery phrase” screen under Brave Wallet. (#19021)
  • Added the ability to set a wallet network as active under brave://settings/wallet/networks. (#19930)
  • Added tooltip showing exact date and time to transaction history under Brave Wallet. (#19789)
  • Added plus icon to “Select Network” dropdown which navigates to brave://settings/wallet/networks in a new tab. (#19763)
  • Added EIP-55 checksum address checks in the send widget. (#19532)
  • Added display of active transactions and token balances in the panel. (#19533)
  • Added support for “wallet_watchAsset” method to add suggested tokens. (#17878)
  • Added notification for Uphold verified users when Customer Due Diligence survey needs to be completed. (#20427)
  • Added first-party ephemeral storage with domain block functionality. (#19099)
  • [Security] Added .torrc file into Brave. (#17851)
  • [Security] Fixed “Allow scripts once” under shields not working in certain cases. #20744) & #20503)
  • Enabled EIP-1559 Type-2 transactions for Trezor keyring. (#20116)
  • Improved auto focusing on several input elements throughout Brave Wallet. (#19326)
  • Improved keyboard accessibility for Brave Wallet. (#20164)
  • Improved hardware wallet account naming. (#19507)
  • Implemented common password validation. (#19875)
  • Updated UI for “Verify recovery phrase” screen to better display 24 word recovery phrases. (#20125)
  • Updated wallet import flow. (#18534)
  • Updated rewards payout status messaging. (#18602)
  • Disabled viewing “Site Permissions” for Brave Wallet panel in certain cases. (#20094)
  • Disabled Happiness Tracking Survey (HaTS). (#19685)
  • Removed “navigator.connection”. (#20122)
  • Removed known user tracking parameters “igshid” from certain URLs. (#11580)
  • Removed the “Network”, “Address” and “Account Orb” from the “Add/Switch Network” panel under Brave Wallet. (#19692)
  • Removed price fetching for assets with a zero balance. (#20280)
  • Removed permission lifetime options from U2F permission dialog. (#19848)
  • Reduced BAT threshold before being able to verify Uphold two-way user wallet from 15 to 2 BAT. (#19911)
  • Reduced disclaimer row padding. (#19449)
  • Fixed token details not being auto-populated when adding custom asset under Brave Wallet. (#18704)
  • Fixed unable to sign messages on https://www.cryptokitties.co using Trezor. (#19504)
  • Fixed token name missing from “Allow Spend” panel under Brave Wallet. (#19556)
  • Fixed typed data signing issues with https://looksrare.org. (#20541)
  • Fixed input value not being reset when network is changed. (#19354)
  • Fixed broken icons for custom network base currency. (#19953)
  • Fixed redundant ordinal numbers in wallet recovery phrase. (#19813)
  • Fixed last connected account being selected when multiple accounts are provided for OpenSea. (#19750)
  • Upgraded Chromium to 98.0.4758.87. (#20814) (Changelog for 98.0.4758.87)
Brave Release Notes | Brave Browser
 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

Tried Brave again. Thanks to a MT-member (forgot who) attended me to the blank new page option. I am preparing for Edge Bing Bling Bloat adopting ManifestV3 (replaced uBO by AG) and saddling up Brave as a last escape when Bing Bling Bloat keeps adding options. The slow Brave loading problem on my PC also seems to have gone. So far so good keeping Brave as secondary browser.
 

silversurfer

Level 83
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Aug 17, 2014
7,266

Release Notes V1.35.101 (Feb 9, 2022)​

  • Fixed ad confirmations not being sent when the viewed ad has been removed from the catalog for users with Brave Ads enabled. (#20890)
  • Fixed swap quotes being incorrectly rounded in certain cases that lead to issues estimating gas fees for Brave Wallet. (#20872)
  • Fixed token assets not selectable under the “Visible Asset” modal for Brave Wallet. (#20857)
  • Fixed ETH fiat amounts always displaying zero within the transaction panel for Brave Wallet. (#20883)
 

oldschool

Level 66
Thread author
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Mar 29, 2018
5,583
Ephemeral Third-party Site Storage | Brave Browser
last updated Feb 1, 2021

Tweet this article

This post describes work done by Principal Engineer Brian Johnson, Senior Software Engineer Ivan Efremov, and Senior Privacy Researcher Peter Snyder.

The TL;DR​

Since our first release, Brave has by default blocked all third-party application storage (e.g., cookies, localStorage, indexedDB). Blocking third-party storage protects Brave users from the most common forms of tracking, but can also break sites. This post presents “ephemeral site storage”, a new strategy for managing third-party storage in Brave, designed to improve Web compatibility, while maintaining the same level of privacy protection.

“Ephemeral site storage” can be enabled in Brave Nightly now, by visiting brave://flags and setting “Enable Ephemeral Storage” to “Enabled.” The feature will be enabled by default on our Desktop and Android browsers shortly, once the system has been sufficiently tested in Nightly.

Background: Brave’s Current Third-Party Storage Protections​

Most tracking on the Web, for most of the Web’s history, has relied on “third-party storage”, or the saving and retransmitting of unique identifiers to sites other than the one you intend to visit. This tracking and re-identification occurs generally without your consent, or even knowledge. And for nearly as long, privacy focused browsers have different techniques to protect users against tracking that relies on third-party storage.

To date Brave has had the most aggressive policy of a popular, general use browser; namely, disabling third-party storage all together. While blocking third-party storage provides strong privacy protections, those protections come with the significant risk of breaking sites that expect third-party storage to be available. And, unfortunately, since the most popular browser allows mostly unrestricted third-party storage, most sites are built assuming third-party storage.

As a result, it’s not uncommon for sites to break in Brave, forcing users into the no-win choice of either having their privacy violated, or having a diminished browsing experience. To date we’ve dealt with breaking sites through a combination of script injections, DOM modifications, and as-narrow-as-possible storage exceptions. While this has (mostly) worked, it’s deeply unsatisfactory, and still involves some risk of privacy loss.

The rest of this blog presents “ephemeral site storage”, a new system that protects against tracking, at a far lower risk of breaking benign site functionality. The post then describes how “ephemeral site storage” compares to the third-party storage policies in other browsers.

How “Ephemeral Site Storage” Works​

“Ephemeral site storage” is the result of combining several smaller storage decisions. We’re currently evaluating each of these decisions during our test period, so any of these details may change as we get more experience and feedback.

First, never send cookies on third-party sub-resource requests. Brave will continue sending cookies for sub-resource requests that occur in the main document, or in other sub-documents that are local (i.e., same-site) to the main document, but Brave will not send cookies on cross-origin sub-resource requests occurring in the first-party context. Brave also will not send cookies on any sub-resource requests occurring in a third-party context (cross-origin or otherwise).

Second, third-party frames get partitioned storage for some DOM storage APIs. JavaScript executing in a third-party frame can use the document.cookie, localStorage and sessionStorage APIs, though the values they see are partitioned under the first-party site. This means that code running in a social.org <iframe> embedded on example.org will see different storage than a social.org <iframe> embedded on other.org. Our initial “ephemeral site storage” implementation only allows sites to access these three storage APIs; all other DOM storage APIs are still disabled for third-parties, though we may enable more in the future.

Third, storage is shared for all first-party instances of the same site. If a user has two tabs open to the same site (i.e., same eTLD+1), third-parties on those sites will see the same storage area, and can use it to communicate. For example, say you have two tabs open for the same site, first.example.org and second.example.org, and that both of these pages include an embedded YouTube iframe. Both instances of the YouTube iframe would see the same storage area. However, a YouTube embed on different.org would see a different storage area, and a tab loading youtube.com directly would see a third storage area.

Fourth, third-party storage partitions are cleared when the last first-party document is closed. As mentioned before, third-party documents get a different storage area for each top-level site. As long as there is at least one top-level document open for the site, the storage area will persist, and the third-party will see the same storage for any new top-level documents for the same-top level site. However, when there are no longer any top-level documents for a site, all third-party partitions under that site are cleared. If you later revisit the same first-party site, all third-parties embedded on that site will see new, empty storage areas.

Fifth, storage partitions are cleared when the browser is restarted. When you quit Brave, all partitioned storage areas are cleared, regardless of whether you’re restarting the browser, or if you have “Continue where you left off” and related features enabled. This matches when Brave rotates the random seed used to randomize your browser fingerprint, and is done in part to avoid the kinds of unexpectedly long-lasting session values that have been discussed by Eric Lawrence on the Edge team.

The above describes our initial version of “ephemeral site storage”. While we’re excited to deploy and share this version of it, we will be evaluating it in practice, to see how it can be further improved. A partial list of additions we’re considering are integration with the Storage Access API (implemented in Chromium by the terrific Edge team), sending partitioned cookies with iframe navigation, and adding additional DOM Storage APIs. Any changes to the “ephemeral site storage” policy described here will be discussed in future posts.

Comparison With, and Credit To, Other Browsers​

The “ephemeral site storage” system described in this post sits alongside other great work done by other privacy oriented browser vendors. We now briefly describe how “ephemeral site storage” compares to browser’s third-party storage policies, both to give credit to the ideas we’ve built from, and to motivate some of the choices made in Brave’s solution.

In many ways, our “ephemeral site storage” proposal is most similar to how Safari manages third-party storage. Safari deserves enormous credit for popularizing partitioning third-party storage as a defense against third-party tracking. Safari, along with the Tor Browser Bundle (TBB, which has long partitioned third party storage as part of a larger “First-Party Isolation” feature), gives third-parties different storage areas, depending on which site they’re embedded in.

Brave’s implementation also draws from Safari’s strategy of “ephemeral” third-party storage. However, Brave’s approach differs from Safari’s in a significant way. Safari clears third-party storage partitions when the browser is closed; Brave clears third-party storage when the site is closed. While each approach has its trade-offs, our site-length approach protects Brave users against certain cases where a third-party might be able to link first-party accounts, in a way the first-party didn’t intend. Nevertheless, we want to note and credit the Safari and TBB teams for, in many ways, pioneering partitioned application storage.

Additionally, we want to appreciate and highlight related work the Firefox team has done in this area. Firefox is also testing a partitioned application storage approach in nightly versions of the browser (though the approaches differ; where Brave persists partitions for only as long as you are interacting with the site, partitions in Firefox are persistent. Partitions in Safari persist until you quit the browser).

Also, while in some aspects Brave’s “ephemeral site storage” approach is more aggressive than the Safari, Firefox, and TBB approaches, there are other areas where the other browsers are leading the way. While Brave’s current approach focuses on the most common ways storage is used to track users, Safari, Firefox and TBB currently partition other kinds of storage more comprehensively than Brave does. This includes (depending on the browser) the HTTP cache, other network caches, services workers, other DOM Storage APIs, etc. Firefox in particular recently announced an impressive and comprehensive partitioning strategy. These are extremely important parts of protecting Web privacy, and their teams deserve tremendous credit for their leading work.

We also want to note the terrific work being done by the Chromium team on implementing partitioning of caches and network services. This work is extremely difficult and subtle, and doesn’t often attract the attention that new user-visible features receive, but is nonetheless vital to improving privacy on the Web. So we note and appreciate the critical work the Chromium team is doing around in the area, and the security and privacy improvements it’ll bring to users of Chrome, Brave, Edge and other Chromium-family browsers.

Finally, we want to thank folks whose comments and thinking (knowingly or otherwise) have been helpful in our thinking around “ephemeral site storage”, including Michael Kleber, Maciej Stachowiak, John Wilander, Steven Englehardt, and Anne van Kesteren.

Special Acknowledgment: We also want to thank Martin Robinson and Cathie Chen from Igalia for their help in developing and implementing this feature in Brave.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

The guy writing the blogs really is a good content marketeer, what he says (with a lot of fancy words)

Brave is starting to experiment with site containment like Safari and Firefox. Brave is not even close to partitioning as much as data as those two leaders do.
Fact is we (brave) are the only chromium based browser who had some (complex with massive overhead) mechanisms against third-party tracking (which is true nothing lied about that fact) . The blog writer is also happy to announce that Brave clears third-party data containers as soon as the user closes that website. Doing so Brave applies a more aggressive clearing policy thus we (Brave) are better and braver already! 😇😇😇

Read this article on remarketing/retargeting: What is Remarketing - Why and How it Works | Outbrain First sentence of that article says "Have you ever visited a website, and then the next day, while browsing online, you saw an ad for the very same website? What is crucial in the explanation is the word NEXT DAY. The whole idea of third-party tracking misuses is to SURVIVE BETWEEN BROWSER SESSIONS (and ideally between devices). It is to pertain data when you quit the browser, not the tab (making Brave's higher clearing frequency as useful as mounting a Ferrari engine in a Tuk-Tuk). :cautious::cautious::cautious:

It takes a thief to catch thieves. :):):)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jan Willy

Level 7
Verified
Well-known
Jul 5, 2019
338
@Kees1958
Isn't this rather ironic? False positive?
Edit: or once a thief, always a thief?
 

Attachments

  • Schermafbeelding 2022-02-20 110234.jpg
    Schermafbeelding 2022-02-20 110234.jpg
    36.1 KB · Views: 34
Last edited:

Azure

Level 27
Verified
Top poster
Content Creator
Oct 23, 2014
1,607
The guy writing the blogs really is a good content marketeer, what he says (with a lot of fancy words)

Brave is starting to experiment with site containment like Safari and Firefox. Brave is not even close to partitioning as much as data as those two leaders do.
Fact is we (brave) are the only chromium based browser who had some (complex with massive overhead) mechanisms against third-party tracking (which is true nothing lied about that fact) . The blog writer is also happy to announce that Brave clears third-party data containers as soon as the user closes that website. Doing so Brave applies a more aggressive clearing policy thus we (Brave) are better and braver already! 😇😇😇

Read this article on remarketing/retargeting: What is Remarketing - Why and How it Works | Outbrain First sentence of that article says "Have you ever visited a website, and then the next day, while browsing online, you saw an ad for the very same website? What is crucial in the explanation is the word NEXT DAY. The whole idea of third-party tracking misuses is to SURVIVE BETWEEN BROWSER SESSIONS (and ideally between devices). It is to pertain data when you quit the browser, not the tab (making Brave's higher clearing frequency as useful as mounting a Ferrari engine in a Tuk-Tuk). :cautious::cautious::cautious:

It takes a thief to catch thieves. :):):)
If you want to could try to contact pes10k, he might be able to talk to you in a more technical aspect without the need of any “marketing”

 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

If you want to could try to contact pes10k, he might be able to talk to you in a more technical aspect without the need of 'marketing'.
I enjoy a good (content marketing) read, nothing wrong with marketing, I just translated some technical features to every day practical use.

To show it is not just my opinion I provided a link which explained re-marketing to show the more technical advanced clearing policy is as effective in daily use as mounting a Ferrari engine in a Tuk-Tuk. I can't be more clear and explicit about the usefulness of Brave's braver clearing policy.

Firefox and Safari use more robust (and more effective) site containment, so don't try to sell Brave as more advanced.
 

Nightwalker

Level 23
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Well-known
May 26, 2014
1,270
I enjoy a good (content marketing) read, nothing wrong with marketing, I just translated some technical features to every day practical use.

To show it is not just my opinion I provided a link which explained re-marketing to show the more technical advanced clearing policy is as effective in daily use as mounting a Ferrari engine in a Tuk-Tuk. I can't be more clear and explicit about the usefulness of Brave's braver clearing policy.

Firefox and Safari use more robust (and more effective) site containment, so don't try to sell Brave as more advanced.

But why Firefox and Safari use more robust and effective site containment compared to Brave? Could you explain in a technical level?

Ps: I dont see anything wrong with Brave's blog posts, but I dont have the technical prowess to prove that they are misleading and/or with wrong information.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

But why Firefox and Safari use more robust and effective site containment compared to Brave? Could you explain in a technical level?

Ps: I dont see anything wrong with Brave's blog posts, but I dont have the technical prowess to prove that they are misleading and/or with wrong information.
Nothing wrong with their blog post, it is great story. Brave is the only chromium based browser with third-party data restrictions. They are now changing from javascript injection to site compartimensation. Only they don't compartimentize (yet) as much as Safari and Firefox. This is mentioned in the post by Brave themselves so again no misleading information.

Why do you get the impression I am accusing Brave of providing misleading information?
 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

For those who did not got the picture. Brave advertises their third-party compartimensation to be more aggressive than Firefox and Safari by clearing after tab closure.

As explained by the outbrain post (also an adnetwork), retargeting or remarketing is intended for cross browser session tracking (hencee the emphasis on NEXT DAY in outbrain explination). So clearing it at tab close has zero practical use, while Brave brings this as an improvement over Safari and Firefox website compartimensation (which is nonsence).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Venustus

Nightwalker

Level 23
Verified
Helper
Top poster
Content Creator
Well-known
May 26, 2014
1,270
Nothing wrong with their blog post, it is great story. Brave is the only chromium based browser with third-party data restrictions. They are now changing from javascript injection to site compartimensation. Only they don't compartimentize (yet) as much as Safari and Firefox. This is mentioned in the post by Brave themselves so again no misleading information.

Why do you get the impression I am accusing Brave of providing misleading information?

Because of what and how you wrote some things in your recent posts:

"The guy writing the blogs really is a good content marketeer, what he says (with a lot of fancy words)"

"Brave is starting to experiment with site containment like Safari and Firefox. Brave is not even close to partitioning as much as data as those two leaders do."

"Firefox and Safari use more robust (and more effective) site containment, so don't try to sell Brave as more advanced."

"It is to pertain data when you quit the browser, not the tab (making Brave's higher clearing frequency as useful as mounting a Ferrari engine in a Tuk-Tuk)."

For example, Brave Team even recognized that Firefox and Safari were (at that time) superior in some aspects to Brave, so again, at that time they were not trying to sell Brave as more advanced, they clearly mentioned that it wasnt:

Also, while in some aspects Brave’s “ephemeral site storage” approach is more aggressive than the Safari, Firefox, and TBB approaches, there are other areas where the other browsers are leading the way. While Brave’s current approach focuses on the most common ways storage is used to track users, Safari, Firefox and TBB currently partition other kinds of storage more comprehensively than Brave does. This includes (depending on the browser) the HTTP cache, other network caches, services workers, other DOM Storage APIs, etc. Firefox in particular recently announced an impressive and comprehensive partitioning strategy. These are extremely important parts of protecting Web privacy, and their teams deserve tremendous credit for their leading work.

But nowadays? I think Brave has the advantage, especially if you count its native rust based adblocker and its fingerprint protection:

The TL;DR​

Brave now includes network-state partitioning features, protecting Brave users from an even greater range of online tracking techniques. Brave already includes the most aggressive strategy for partitioning DOM storage of any popular browser (giving Brave users extremely strong protections against the most common forms of online-tracking). Brave now provides comparable protections against less-common, more-sophisticated forms of tracking, ensuring Brave users have the best overall privacy protections available. These new features build on Brave’s many other powerful and novel protections, and ensure that Brave users benefit from the most robust and comprehensive privacy protections available in any popular browse

Source: Partitioning Network-State for Privacy | Brave Browser

Plus:

TL;DR;​

Brave continues to ship the most aggressive and broad privacy protections available in any popular browser. Desktop and Android versions of Brave now include:


Source: GrabBag 3: Fixing PoolParty, Improving Fingerprinting Protections, More Debouncing, and Less Chromium | Brave Browser

Ps: In accordance with PrivacyTests only Librewolf is doing better than Brave, but the user may experience much more breakage and non working sites.
 
Last edited:
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

:D:D

so wich you prefer after manifest3 is live?

Adguard + browser vs brave
I am betting on both currently: Edge+AdGuard and Brave, so undecided.

Like the discussion I had with dev of JavaScriptShelter (before they decided to switch tactics) sometimes tech guys think more is better, but you have to look at how digital advertising works in practise.

I am not accusing Brave of misleading info, just think it would be more effective to first copy mechanisms of Safari and Firefox, before technically tweaking them (increasing clearing interval may be a technical improvement, it is nit a practical improvement).
 
F

ForgottenSeer 92963

But nowadays? I think Brave has the advantage, especially if you count its native rust based adblocker and its fingerprint protection:
Yes, their content marketing is great.

Read my comment at Pool party protection post, it still allows 10 full dupplex data connecrions so how much real protection does this provide you compared with a simple websocket blockrule in AG base filter?

JavascriptShelter (with its new tactic) and AG or uBo offer simular protection on Edge for instance.

I am not telling Brave is bad, (I am using it as secondary browser also), just telling that Brave is not as brave privacy protector as you might think reading their blog post.

I am also not telling that companies are not allowed to show their best version of themselves in company communication (after all blogposts are also marketing communication).

Only when the impression is to much on the positive, I am responding. Again as this may sound playing claims down, all in all I am not negative looking upon Brave.
 
Last edited by a moderator: