this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2026
78 points (81.0% liked)

Privacy

51283 readers
119 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Old man alert. Nerd alert. EXTREME snoozefest alert. You've been warned, continue reading at your own peril!

originally posted in /c/technology but was removed quickly, presumably because it's not considered a tech article or news. This is probably the better fit anyhow

For those who aren't familiar with the Brave browser, its history and controversies, or Gecko engine vs. Chromium engine (and loosely, Webkit), it's probably worth reading up on first. I'm writing this with the assumption that you know all of this stuff, because otherwise this post would be an even longer novel than it already is.

Brave recently released a paid version of their browser called Brave Origin which strips out a bunch of "features" like web3, AI, crypto, telemetry, etc.

It has a dedicated installer separate from the normal browser, except on mobile where the features can be batch disabled after verifying your license. You can also do it that way on the desktop version if you want to. Apparently a standalone android Origin app may be in the works, and the licensing system does seem to be relatively privacy preserving and not overly restrictive.

It's pretty damn expensive (except for Linux where it's free). And I must say that I feel like an outlier, because I strongly approve of this release and the direction I'm seeing the company take.

Let me state these right now:

  • Brave's controversies are real and they were completely unacceptable and they are a permanent mark on their reputation. It's no wonder many distrust them.
  • I'm fully aware that this still indirectly utilizes Google's work, and that Google creates open source projects, pumps a ton of money into them, gets a ton of contributers on board, and then starts introducing proprietary blobs which handicaps competition while effectively squeezing free work and investment out of others.
  • I love FOSS with all my heart.
  • I could add a bunch of disclaimers but I'll address them if I see something in the comments.

In a perfect world I would hate Brave's decision. In our current reality I think it's about the best move they could've made as a for-profit company outside of just creating their own browser engine. But there's a reason there are so few options for engines right now, and it's because it's really fucking complex to make one and it takes a fuckload of time, money, and resources. When somebody develops a genuine engine contender, I'll need to circle back.

Many of us use Firefox (or FF fork) with extensions. Many use ungoogled Chromium or other Chromoum forks. Obviously totally fine.

But there's a few issues with the current browser space, as I see them.

First is that the reality is, much of the web now treats Chrome (rather, the Chromium engine) as a first-class citizen. Some sites run significantly faster or more reliably on Chromium. Some sites require Chromium to fully function. For example, want to use the GrapheneOS web installer? You need a Chromium-based browser. Chromium has lots of features under the hood that the modern web utilizes. If this has never been a consideration for you, then this particular point is moot.

Second is that data harvesting and tracking is becoming wayyy more advanced than even some techies might know about - and let's be real, it's becoming pretty fucking exhausting to keep up with the growing pile of bullshit being thrown our way. It's also becoming harder and harder to stop. In both Gecko and Chromium you can, to varying degrees, install extensions, use browser forks, adjust settings, etc. to prevent much or even all of this. But the absolutely unfathomable amount of money being poured into violating your privacy needs hard, sustained, expensive work to fight in meaningful and new ways. One recent example I read about is brave implementing a new GPU anti-fingerprinting measure which is something I hadn't even considered before.

Third is that the Internet of today is just straight-up busted. Yes there are super cool projects in the works such as I2P that are trying to change that. But they're not reaching mass adoption any time soon. Most people can't even bother trying to leave for places like Lemmy and that's much less friction than I2P. I absolutely am not defeatist, and I fight this shit like the plague it is, but we also need to live our lives.

Fourth is that the way we use the internet varies. There's a lot of things we could do to make sure we're always maximally protected, but usually we find a balance. Stuff we daily drive, stuff we use when there's a specific need, stuff we're forced to use. If you're hardcore enough to do things to the max at all times then you don't even need to read this - you can browse in Mullvad Browser with (or without) a VPN or the Tor Browser, and supplement with OS and hardware privacy measures, etc... and you're likely better protected for it. But for me, and I suspect for many others, in typical daily use we want the right balance of speed, usability, privacy, and security.

Those "features" that brave bundles in are really shitty. But the mass market time and time again shows they'll put up with a lot of bullshit. And for most people you can just manually toggle the majority of these things off in the main browser for free, and it doesn't take more than a few minutes. These features, like it or not, pull in a lot more money than what most non-profits get when solely relying on donations. Hell, one of the huge things keeping Firefox propped up is their search engine deal with Google, not the donations.

Brave, like it or not, does provide some pretty compelling value in other places. First and foremost it's good to see people seeking out alternatives to Chrome for literally any reason. But they are admittedly super on-top of their Ad-blocking, anti-fingerprinting, other privacy features (like the shred tab button), and update cadence. They're the closest thing to a well-funded Chrome competitor that, unfortunately for our reality, runs on Chromium.

I get that it feels wrong to pay to remove features from your browser. But you know what, I'm sick of the micro transaction ad filled privacy invading bulls hit joke of an economy the internet has accepted at large. If it were up to me I would bring back freeware and shareware. Brave is the modern day WinRAR in an alternate universe where 7zip wasn't invented yet and the built in unzip still didn't support other formats.

I'm going to continue using my Gecko based browsers as I always have. But for when I want or need something from Chromium, I think Brave Origin is my new go-to. For me that's when I need certain hardware integration or I'm on a specific site, and chromium in my experience works very well with Android. One other thing I learned which to me is a definite plus, is that it was developed by the Ex-Ceo of Mozilla and creator of JavaScript (that was cool to learn, and that's one guy btw, not two).

For those who think this I'm suspiciously positive about Brave, I get it. I literally thought of brave as spyware until I read about Brave Origin. I think it's a sincere effort to correct course in a way that let's them operate at the level they need to maintain their product. For most people reading this who feel like trying Brave, they should just spend 5 minutes adjusting the browser settings. If you're clinically insane like me, and you actually resonated with this post, then maybe try it. And if you wanna buy it and chargeback or find a torrent or whatever, I don't really care.

I suppose this post is solely about Brave if we lived in a vacuum. But actually I think it's about sharing a mindset which I think can help the internet improve just a little bit, Brave or not.

Finally, let me end on a tangent about Alphabet Inc., mostly Google. That company is full of very smart ~~sociopaths~~ people who grabbed the internet by its collective ballsack, and while it may have felt good for a minute, they started squeezing them until you forgot what it feels like to have your balls flapping in the wind again. They made AOSP and then fucked us. They made Chromium and then fucked us. They did the heavy lifting for RCS and then fucked us. Google fucking sucks. And RIP to the word 'googol', you were robbed.

Honourable Webkit mention for Orion browser, and also their search engine Kagi which I fucking ADORE!

Tl;dr Brave Origin is alright, maybe try it, or don't.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Pay premium for a privacy focused browser? No.

I'd rather build my own browser from scratch. What fucking world do we live in?

Actually, I'd rather never browse the internet again.

[–] stinkytofuisgood@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

Never browsing the internet again is the real secret to happiness. It's about a stone's throw away for many of us who care deeply about it.

[–] JenitalJouster@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

i’m on iphone currently which i know isn’t ideal but im riding this device out to its death until i make the switch to grapheneOS. that being said even with the lack of alternatives you wont catch me using brave ever, the ceo is insane, and they just had too many controversies. that 60 bucks is better spent donating to any other FOSS project.

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 68 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If youre willing to pay for a browser, donate that money to an OSS project that creates an actual private & secure browser.

It is insane to give money to a company like Brave for a browser that removes the stuff they deliberately packed in to their core browser to track people and make money.

At best what Brave are showing is that privately owned companies can't make private secure browsers because they are profit motivated. The only way privacy can happen is to remove the profit motive entirely.

[–] Amaterasu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Genuine question, isn't Brave an OSS project?

[–] marcie@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Brave is a very secure browser with the correct settings. Grapheneos agrees with this take as well and consider it the second most secure chromium browser (though imo vanadium has it's own shortcomings in regards to AdBlock, brave shields is very effective). Read my other comment for an analysis

I wouldn't pay for it because that deliberately destroys most privacy benefits. Origin is only worth it on Linux imo. Brave mostly takes advantage of tech illiterate people so the tech literate people can secure their privacy and blend in to a larger crowd. It's not very ethical but they are the largest privacy browser as a result of being able to afford ad campaigns from this exploitation of illiteracy. I mostly dream of the day that someone forks it and makes it perfect on the backs of all their development money

[–] stinkytofuisgood@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Surprisingly enough when using the Origin build of brave I saw no measurable difference in fingerprinting artifacts after reviewing the list from EFF's Cover Your Tracks and browserleaks.com

Your point about the Origin build reducing privacy via a smaller user pool was a huge concern for me, so those findings were a relief.

Also yes, many will toggle settings such as 'Ask not to track' (forget the exact label), to on, or adding identifying, uncommon, and regional extensions (kinda any third party ones tbh) - believing that they're increasing their privacy but unfortunately, significantly increasing chances of successful fingerprinting.

I don't blame people, it's such a cluster fuck and the wisdom of old has drastically changed.

[–] marcie@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Surprisingly enough when using the Origin build of brave I saw no measurable difference in fingerprinting artifacts after reviewing the list from EFF’s Cover Your Tracks and browserleaks.com

I haven't done a really big audit of the two yet to determine their differences in fingerprinting, but ostensibly its a different browser and has a much smaller userbase and it would be harder for you to hide your fingerprint. Linux is an even smaller subsect of a subsect and likely has only maybe a couple thousand users on Linux's Origin. If you don't care about that so much and stick to open source websites its not a very big deal if you're just trying to avoid big tech algorithms.

It is a pretty big browser at this point though. It is also generally more resilient to the shenanigans that websites pull to track you over other browsers due to their hardened containers between tabs. Firefox is a bad choice for this reason alone, the sandboxing is nearly nonexistent, even Tor Browser advises you to stick to one tab only. And for similar reasons, you should never install Brave through Flathub until Flathub-Next fixes the nested containerization issue that tampers with Chromium tab containers (170k people have done so regardless of this).

[–] stinkytofuisgood@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yeah, the result was weird to me too. I've been meaning to message the devs to get a concrete answer but I've been lazy.

All the rest read, acknowledged and agreed.

(for anyone reading this in the spooky future, we're mainly discussing browser fingerprinting and other privacy technologies. Context matters, buckos)

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 89 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I don't know how anyone can trust brave after the shit they pulled. They told us who they are. Believe them.

[–] BrilliantBadger@piefed.ca 14 points 2 days ago

100%. It's almost like we haven't learned a single thing from the numerous examples of how we got here.

I try to live by that same motto - when they show you who they are, believe them. Its never been wrong, and it won't be with brave. Happily won't be part of building them up.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Dude. This is just ransomware with better marketing.

If it spies on you until you pay the creator, that's ransomware.

[–] Amaterasu@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Brave origin and the bloated one are open source. If you think is ramsoware, you can check the code, if you don’t have the skill look for the audit.

May I ask which browser are you using?

[–] marcie@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I don't really think it's that simple. They currently have the best security focused AdBlock of any browser (built in rust, default to the browser, works on a higher level than ublock origin, immune to upstream changes like manifest v3, can clear persistent data for specific sites, has containerization modes for changing browser fingerprint on the fly). I'm hoping vanadium or ungoogled chromium (security nightmare btw even though it has no startup telemetry, but I do think it's an interesting project for learning purposes) eventually adds brave shields to their browsers. The default settings aren't great but the right settings config clears out all potential telemetry and phoning home.

For what it's worth, the grapheneos team agrees with me and considers brave to be the second best chromium browser after vanadium for security purposes 🤷‍♀️

[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Very secure ransomware with high utility-value is still ransomware.

If it spies on you until you pay the creator, it’s ransomware.

[–] marcie@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I never said it spies on you until you pay the creator. The settings can be tweaked to remove all of that nonsense with simple guides from e.g. privacyguides or similar. Firefox has the same fundamental issue, so its funny that this is some point of consternation.

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Please look up the definition of ransomware. This type of hysterical embellishment undermines your point.

[–] stinkytofuisgood@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

This is a much more concise and probably more effective way to explain a good chunk of what I wrote out.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lime@feddit.nu 51 points 2 days ago (3 children)

interestingly, if your choice is to allow the stuff that calls home or pay to disable, that is illegal under the gdpr.

also the founder is still a bigot so i don't really want to give them money.

[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

Yep, we already had a word for software that spies on you until you pay the creator—“ransomware.”

[–] milbyte11@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

many sites do this for cookies, no one cares about GDPR. hell, The sun is literally based in the UK and while they aren't in the EU now they still have a GDPR implementation, yet they've been doing this for years.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 1 day ago

yup, litigation is ongoing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago (4 children)

For example, want to use the GrapheneOS web installer? You need a Chromium-based browser.

This is because Firefox does not support WebUSB. It is not currently possible to make a version of the Graphene web installer that supports Firefox. Graphene doesn't get a say in the matter.

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is because Firefox does not support WebUSB

Ok, but why doesn't Firefox support WebUSB?

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

I can't find the source, but Google's LLM summary says it's because of potential security issues, which sounds plausible.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Brave owns an ad network and that’s all I need to know to never use any of their products.

There are other comparable options that have better companies behind them.

Kagi’s Orion has not given me a reason to hate them except that it isn’t open source. They don’t sell your data and they don’t serve ads.

I can use uBlock on Orion,

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Echo5@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Appreciate your post, nice to see people having level takes for something. I normally go through all my browser settings anyway during setup so a lot of the technical issues people were having I see as nonissue, UNLESS it gets added in during an update (where I wouldn’t notice) and is opt-out, not opt-in. It’s a good recommend for new users who aren’t super tech savvy and just need a plug and play.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I'm happy with Vivaldi since over 10 Years and Zen as second, both European Browsers (Norway and Spain) which don't sell my data and my soul. Ethics respect the user and transparency are very important for me and Brave don't offer it, but shady business models. Thanks

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›