Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other browsers don't have "normal" names either.
Chrome and Internet Explorer are both trivially descriptive names.
Internet Explorer yes, Chrome no.
Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
161–170 of 210 posts
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if it is securely wiped multiple times. At that point they'll go looking at your DNS provider and ISP, or local fusion center.
Right, but my browser isn't doing that. Therefore the original point still stands.
> Because it is a well known fact that it is trivially easy for a resourced attacker to retrieve data from a storage medium well after your computer claims it is deleted.
No it isn't. You said nothing about a browser. You said storage medium.
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#163well, compared to undisclosed affiliate marketing for trading sites[1], soliciting of donations without consent[2] or the recent redirection through affiliate links[3], this seems pretty tame. [1]: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/8793 [2]: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-br... [3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027
brave's biggest innovation is the introduction of direct payments. i hope that catches on, even if brave fails, because it will truly transform the economics of the internet.
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
DDG's CEO has a shady background. It's not as privacy centric as they claim to be.
Subsequent comments have pointed to the founder’s background. What’s the evidence that DDG itself is not privacy centric as claimed?
1. Founded Names Database - a social media website designed to collect user information as aggressively as possible, before selling all the information to classmates.com.[1] (got this from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23709270)
2. Invested in Locately TWO YEARS after founding DDG.[2]
Locately, for those unfamiliar with the company, had built a proprietary data-mining engine which collected data from customers’ (opted-in) mobile phones in order to understand more about what sort of behaviors they were engaging in out in the real world. It could tell how a customer moved from one location to the next, what stores they passed along the way, how long they visited stores, what sort of lifestyle or shopper segment the user fell into, which competing stores a consumer would frequent, how a business compared to its rivals, and much more.
3. The DDG favicon issue since 2018. Was only promised to be fixed four days ago after it got to the front page of HN.[3]
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_Database
[2]https://www.crunchbase.com/person/gabriel-weinberg
[3]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23708166
> What’s the evidence that DDG itself is not privacy centric as claimed?
Past behavior is a predictor of future behavior. (see: Zuck, Thiel, Facebook, Palantir)
------
Why the downvotes again? I gave a reasonable reply to their question.
At least give me a reason for them... =)
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many other questionable privacy policies from Firefox. Here's one (mobile): https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1265029 But there are many others, just search "firefox privacy concerns" or similar keywords. Telemetry data -- Pocket suggestions -- etc.
You're right, and Pocket being integrated into the browser itself rather than remaining a plugin was the one that drove me to Waterfox a few years ago. I just listed a couple of general issues above for brevity's sake.
Mozilla owns Pocket. Why wouldn’t they include their own service in the browser?
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#166This is a bug, have you guys seen a software bug before? What is it with the appetite for outrage? Using brave on Android devices and not planning to switch
brave's bugs are homophobic
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes: the concept of browsing the web with your privacy preserved has literally zero to do with the concept of bravery. The name is clearly a statement but not one that's ever made any sense to me.
That's not "appropriation", that's just marketing. You can call that "appropriation" if you want but it really just dilutes the very concept you're trying to invoke.
Right, Ubuntu might be considered an appropriated name, but hopefully not because the name is used respectfully by someone who, while not Nguni, is at least familiar with the people.
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, and Pocket being integrated into the browser itself rather than remaining a plugin was the one that drove me to Waterfox a few years ago. I just listed a couple of general issues above for brevity's sake.
Mozilla owns Pocket. Why wouldn’t they include their own service in the browser?
Before they bought Pocket it was a plugin/service that was completely optional. They bought Pocket and integrated it into the browser at a much deeper level, making it opt-out instead of opt-in (and very difficult for the average user to opt out; you have to change several settings in about:config which most users have no idea even exists).
I felt they should have made it an opt-in service that the user can choose on the first launch. Taking away user choice is rarely a good thing, and even less so when dealing with anything privacy related.
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use uMatrix to block scripts on certain domains. I used to use NoScript for this, but switched to uMatrix when I found that it gave me much more fine-grained control over what to allow or block. For ad-blocking, I supplement uMatrix with uBlock Origin. It has its own block lists that it perodically On top of that, I use privoxy as an http proxy. Unfortunately, it can't filter https. Yet another part of my defense i…
> I use uMatrix to block scripts on certain domains. [...] For ad-blocking, I supplement uMatrix with uBlock Origin. As the author of both uBO and uMatrix, I don't understand the need to use uMatrix to block scripts when already using uBO, since uBO can do the same. Even better, uBO supports replacing certain blocked scripts with a local, neutered version (to lower likelihood of site breakage), something which become…
uMatrix gives me the ability to select on a domain and subdomain level where to block or allow script and other page elements using its matrix interface.
If this is possible to do in uBlock Origin, I don't know how.
AFAIK, uBO does not have a similar matrix-like interface. So if the equivalent control is possible somehow, it must be hidden further down in its interface, which makes it much less convenient for me than the simple matrix that's behind a single mouse click for me in uMatrix.
I'd love to learn how uBO can be used like uMatrix, if that's possible. There's no need for both extensions if uBO can do it all, but as far as I know it can't.
Re: Brave Browser, wiping history still leaves trace of visited sites
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mozilla owns Pocket. Why wouldn’t they include their own service in the browser?
Before they bought Pocket it was a plugin/service that was completely optional. They bought Pocket and integrated it into the browser at a much deeper level, making it opt-out instead of opt-in (and very difficult for the average user to opt out; you have to change several settings in about:config which most users have no idea even exists). I felt they should have made it an opt-in service that the user can choose on…
Pocket, the service for collecting and syncing articles, is basically a separate thing from pocket suggestions.
The original service was integrated a while ago, but it doesn't really have severe privacy implications. If you click a pocket button, it asks you to log in. If you don't click, it does nothing. This is the one that's hard to disable, but it's an annoyance more than a security problem.
Pocket suggestions are newer, showing articles on the new tab page. They are trivial to turn off, and for what it's worth all the sorting/filtering is done locally.