What hasn’t been said as explicitly yet: It being Chromium-based means there’s tons of implementation details that are bad, which will not be listed in any such comparison table.
For example, the Battery Status web standard was being abused, so Mozilla removed their implementation: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/software/battery-status-api-being-removed-from-firefox-due-to-privacy-concerns/
Chromium-based browsers continue to be standards-compliant in this regard.And this is still quite a high-level decision. As a software engineer, I can attest that we make tiny design decisions every single day. I’d much rather have those design decisions made under the helm of a non-profit, with privacy as one of their explicit goals, than under an ad corporation.
And Brave shipping that ad corp implementation with just a few superficial patches + privacy-extensions is what us experts call: Lipstick on a pig.
Unless someone wants to disagree with me
All the code is opensource and no one has ever raised a privacy alarm in a merged pull request. There’s nothing to fear
That website is run by an employee of Brave, who rates the privacy of browsers based on their default settings (which Brave tends to perform best in). If browsers prompt the user to select their privacy settings on a first run, he scores them based as if the user had selected the worst privacy options.
If he actually spent a few minutes setting up each browser, as is always recommended within the privacy community, that table will look a lot different. But then Brave wouldn’t stand out as much…
The product isn’t all that bad, but the company behind it have proven they’re not trustworthy many times over.
it is not even true that “privacytests.org rate it as the best”, if you look close enough, librewolf is best rated, which is an amazing browser BTW.
From the JDLR dept… notice how brave is listed first, and passes every test (except a very few)
This report just looks biased. Even if it is totally legitimate, and many users have pointed out how it isn’t , it looks biased.
It looks like every sales pitch for a product where they list everything their product does and how it’s better than the other things.
I vote librewolf
I agree it can look biased, until you check the initial of each browser.
What comes out ? They are listed by name.
I don’t run Brave because Brave runs a crypto scam right in the browser.
I don’t care that you can disable it, I don’t care that it might be the only way they found to make a buck out of free software: anyone who dabbles in crypto is instantly sketchy. And I don’t want to run a piece of software as critical as a browser made by someone who’s not 100% trustworthy.
I wouldn’t really call it a crypto scam if they aren’t demanding or asking you buy it, just giving you free crypto
brave owns that domain, I believe. Of course they are going to rate their browser te best
They were not rated that well in the beginning. Brave contacted the guy who runs the website and asked about the tests he was running, then patched their browser accordingly until it passed all the tests it does today.
Not exactly, the guy who runs it became a brave employee shortly after starting it. but they claim to continue to run it independently.
I don’t use Brave simply because it’s too buggy. Half the websites I visit don’t load properly.
This isn’t an endorsement for brave, but the websites aren’t loading properly because they are full of the trash that brave blocks, not due to bugs in the browser.
