• Samsy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    So does Librewolf. What’s the benefit of brave? Chrome-based? Checked chromium from time to time and don’t think chrome is superior over Firefox.

    • Hellfire103@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Neither do I. I use Mullvad Browser, which is based on Firefox.

      Brave has its own content blocking system, which is on-par with uBO and better than uBO Lite. I tested it myself a while back, and Cover Your Tracks, Fingerprint.com, and CreepJS indicated that it was incredibly difficult to fingerprint: moreso than Librewolf, but slightly less so than Tor/Mullvad.

      That said, however, PrivacyTests.org indicates that Librewolf blocks more tracking technologies than Brave, so it’s possible things have changed since I last experimented with browsers other than Tor and Mullvad.

        • pineapple@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Wow I got downvoted a lot on that I thought it was a generally agreed upon fact. Source (graphene os)

          I still use firefox btw because I prefer it for many other reasons but chromium is definetely more secure.

          • pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            12 hours ago

            GraphaneOS founder has fetish for Chromium and he hates F-Droid 1

            tldr: he accuse f-droid not being secure and citing this bs post https://privsec.dev/posts/android/f-droid-security-issues/ and he promotes accrescent.app

            • they contain closed-source app
            • they have very flawed understanding of open-source and security 2, 3

            here is some examples:

            Open source doesn’t necessarily mean more secure. I’m aware of many open source apps with numerous well-known security vulnerabilities, as well as many closed-source apps that are highly secure. Furthermore, Accrescent will have a filter to, for example, show only open source apps, so your treatment is incomprehensible.

            Accrescent doesn’t claim to serve only open-source apps and never has out of the belief that an app’s source model doesn’t inherently make it more or less private or secure. Qlango doesn’t violate any explicit or implicit Accrescent policy by the properties you listed, so it would be inappropriate to remove it.

            …In addition, “trackers” are subjective. Accrescent has no plans to enumerate specific libraries or classes and blacklist them solely based on the fact that they connect to Google, Amazon, etc.; collect analytics; or contain proprietary code. This approach isn’t scalable anyway because it is trivial to bypass such detection methods.

            So I take everything GraphaneOS says with a grain of salt

            • Stilic@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Can you stop spreading FUD? This almost feels like a pointless attack on someone who haven’t asked anything… Already that were targeted with harassment…

          • prenatal_confusion@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 hours ago

            One source from a sadly biased author. I am honestly too lazy to aggregate some numbers for CVEs to find out what’s the truth but I am sure that it is not an inherent quality of chromium to be more secure.