You have to be very brave to download that browser
I find this marketing strategy so cringe.
Let’s sell a browser to a crowd obsessed with privacy, feeling better than others, adverse to “normies” so let’s call it Brave. Or Bold. Or Freedom Eagle.
It tries so hard it ends up sounding like a 14 year old boy trying to sell you a NFT.
“Hey kiddo, we are Brave, we are sticking it to the man, we aren’t afraid of those who try to silence us - which is why we are going to insert affiliate links and trackers into your URLs 😎”
Ok but have you tried my nft browser?
I’m not downloading Brave, fuck off
Meanwhile there’s Floorp xD
Well, they do have some sort of crypto integration in that browser, so it makes sense why they come off that way.
deleted by creator
please let us make bad choices and don’t talk about why they’re bad
deleted by creator
there’s a term for appropriating the struggle of an oppressed group the way you just did, but I can’t remember what it is. Anyway - I feel like you’re assuming everyone is talking about you when we’re not… If we don’t like something that you like, you can just mind your own business…?
If there’s a post about someone doing something bad, and people talk about how bad it is, but you think it’s good, are we all supposed to stop talking about it because you showed up?
Sick. Thanks brave.
deleted by creator
Installing VPNs without telling the end user isn’t a good thing.
And that’s what we call a Trojan horse
deleted by creator
O.o did you even click the article? That’s exactly what they did.
Yes they did install services.
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/10/18/brave-is-installing-vpn-services-without-user-consent/
deleted by creator
Please Brave: cutout the bullshit defaults game. Everybody’s getting smarter and companies are getting stupider
Edit: said this b4, don’t fuck with your own competitive advantage where you haven’t had a joint and duly qualified computer science lawyer who explains how easy it is to lose trust and commercial viabillity for a sketchy, underhanded product (see LastPass). Also FUCK LastPass, may this Pass be their Last
I don’t understand when and why Brave became such a household name. It seems so many people use it and swear by it, but its reputation is “suspicious” at best.
Just use Firefox. It’s been around way, way longer and it doesn’t use the Chromium engine. Google doesn’t need more of a monopoly on the internet.
I think if Firefox can find a way to have full parity with chrome extensions, that might be a big shift. I’ve talked to more than one person that has a specific extension they rely on that they can’t duplicate with Firefox options. They have many of the big names, but also some holes
Genuinely curious. What extensions are stopping people from moving to Firefox?
I just spent awhile trying to switch from Vivaldi to Floorp before going back. It just doesn’t work as smoothly, things like tabs wouldn’t save properly between sessions, pinning tabs doesn’t prevent you from closing them, UI elements would disappear, etc.
Not OP, (and Firefox is still my main), but I keep Chromium-based browsers around for Ichigo, an addon which automatically translates raw manga - which is a godsend for avid manga readers like myself who frequently run out of existing translated manga to read. There’s also Scan Translator which works in a similar way, but sadly Firefox has nothing like them.
In my opinion best bet is ungoogled chromium for any extensions or applications that utilize chromium.
It’s the other way around in my experience
I use it as my YouTube/spotify browser because the ad block just works. Firefox is janky because I have other extensions running that screw up playback on some sites (this has gotten a lot better but I still just use brave out of habit)
The only real problem I ever had with Firefox was this privacy option that would disable auto playback on sites like Twitch and TikTok but that was a setting I wasn’t even aware of. Other than that, I rarely ever have an issue with FF outside of web dev when it doesn’t yet support some cutting-edge web API feature.
Yea, it was something with various extensions I had going. I’m not blaming Firefox at all. I love Firefox. Just easier to use the other browser on the occasions when my configuration causes issues than try to troubleshoot it.
I’ve had issues with add-ons on some sites too. For those times I just use a different Firefox profile (each has its own set of add-ons and settings :D)
That’s a good idea.
But what’s wrong with non Chrome Chromium based browsers?
(Just give me downvotes, I don’t care if my question is stupid)
Well Chrome(ium) has almost all of the browser market share and google is trying to push something called web environment integrity which would implement a sort of certification system where web servers evaluate the authenticity of the client. If you extrapolate that idea a bit further it boils down to “we won’t serve you content if we don’t like your browser, device, OS, etc”. Which I would consider as hostile to the open but rapidly closing internet as we know it.
Edit: I forgot to make my point lol. Firefox is a completely different browser engine from the chromium based browsers which is why you see a lot of people recommending firefox because they don’t comply with web integrity. I don’t think it’s working though because this is something only the techbros and the cybersisters care about while everyone else just goes about their day.
Makes sense.
It’s not a stupid question, some people just don’t know.
Mainly it’s because:
- Chromium holds too much market share which is bad for the health of the Web.
- Chromium is controlled by Google which is concerning because they have been known to plant trackers even in software that shouldn’t have them.
- Chromium is inherently less secure, it contains features that might seem nice but are extremely risk to give access to websites i.e. letting websites access Bluetooth.
There are probably plenty more reasons but these are the big ones, and of coarse this is a simplification, in reality things are always a bit more complicated.
Web dev here. Regardless of my opinion, I need to make sure my web projects work on chrome because of market share.
Chromium is still controlled by Google, so having an overwhelming market share of Chromium-based browsers reduces competition and increases Google’s control of the market’s position and future. Using Firefox (and Safari, if it were not locked to a single ecosystem) reduces that threat.
When we say “controlled”, that’s still only accounting for the primary fork, right?
As long as it’s open source, it feels like the idea is that the day Google pushes “feat(): Users now automatically have $1 sent to Google a day” commit, someone creates a “chromium-nongooglefucked” fork repository from the prior commit, and everyone uses that.
K
It just means if they want to do something bad then they can
If Google wanted to they could ban VPNs on all Chromium browsers and all the forks downstream would have to comply
More likely they can make it so only verified websites will load and down the line charge to be verified. It kills the open internet and the ability for anyone to make a website/host it where they want
I don’t trust Brave, there’s too much money tied up in it for it to be good for users.
Question: why would they do that? If you don’t even know it’s there, what good is it doing for them?
It’s also enabled by default.
Edit: Apparently it’s not enabled by default. I tried brave some time ago and remembered that it was enabled, which promoted me to uninstall it immediately. Maybe it was enabled by default then, maybe I misremembered.
Having a VPN basically just means sending your traffic (albeit encrypted) to someone else’s server, before sending it to the wider internet.
That means if you don’t specifically disable it, everything you do in the brave browser could theoretically be logged, processed and analyzed by the owners of brave.
Even if the traffic itself is still encrypted, like with online banking, just knowing how many people in a certain city use which bank for example, could be very interesting to advertisers.
Depending on how evil they are, they could also log extensive amounts of user data, just waiting for the day it becomes legal to sift through it (just like a lot of governments do).
Or maybe they just log and sell your data even though it’s illegal. Like a lot of companies do all the time (see Cambridge Analytical scandal etc.).
Or maybe they don’t. But if I was a browser company I’d sure enjoy having all my users route all their traffic through servers I control.
Holy fuck, well that is a whole other issue…
deleted by creator
the toggle shows up by default, but without a paid subscription the vpn is unusable. even then you need to enable it. you can disable it completely in brave://flags and set “enable experimental brave VPN” to disabled. it’s shitty that they include it by default, but it’s disingenuous to say they’re rerouting traffic of all brave users through their own vpn servers.
Alright, thanks for the correction.
it remains inactive unless the user subscribes.
Nothingburger who cares?
- Download a browser with a built-in VPN
- Get browser and VPN services on your computer
Why is this news?
Because it’s Brave and people like to jump on bandwagons. This is like the 6th time I’ve seen this article posted in lemmybin also.
And since we have the reddit-minded folk here, no, I do not support Brave and never will and I would much rather they disappear from the internet, but using ragebait to complain about the browser installing the necessary files to have one of their advertised services working, like pretty much every other software does, is not the way to move forward.
Yea i don’t get the hate boner for brave. I get it’s sketchy and don’t use it myself, but they aren’t sneakily installing some VPN to redirect all your web traffic without you knowing. They tell you about it right up front because it’s a service they want to sell.
If you don’t like the browser, don’t use it. There isn’t a need to go on some crusade to smear them with bullshit.
It’s a bunch of people upset with the company’s CEO or whatever over personal views. The browser itself wasn’t that bad after you disabled the ad and crypto stuff, which they heavily pushed on you.
I had switched to it from Chrome last year but ended up not caring for it, so I went to Firefox and Librewolf. People can use whatever the hell they want, idgaf. But for those who will eventually end up complaining about YouTube ads and continue to use Chrome, I have no sympathy for if you can’t take the few minutes to download and install a new browser and move your favorites over.
This community has some of the worst biased tech readers.
removed by mod
It’s good users are now aware that Brave includes redundant features that you have to pay extra for to activate. Users browser will update everytime the browser or the VPN software needs an update.
For example Firefox VPN from Mozilla is separate software. They don’t force millions of users to download it even if they don’t want it.
This is yet another example why people should not be using Brave and should be skeptical of its intentions.
They don’t force millions of users to download it even if they don’t want it.
Mozilla has been forcing Pocket on Firefox users for years, as well as Mr Robot ads and numerous other things. They don’t exact have the moral high ground here.
Whats pocket? And why is it bad that its on the browser?
Pocket is Mozilla’s bookmark/sync pay-cloud-service. Comes with Firefox by default and can’t be easily removed. From a company that claims to care about privacy I would expect a self-hosted local-first approach for such problems, not a cloud service.
But its not active unless you turn it on right? Just preinstalled so if you decide to use it its already there?
Cause that does sound like a little bloatware but if thats the only bloat they have and thats its only issue Im not sure Im bothered by it.
that’s exactly what people are complaining in this thread, just about different browser
Brave is shit but calling this a reason to be skeptical is fucking stupid. Almost every piece of software includes features that some subset of users will never touch. That isn’t a reason not to include it.
“Oh no, Firefox includes a bookmark toolbar! I don’t use bookmarks so they need to get rid of this!”
brave is basically installing a future minefield with system-wide access waiting to be triggered by them, or an exploitable bug by others, on all brave users’ pcs and not just those who sub to their vpn service.
removed by mod
Just imagine: using Windows and being concerned about privacy. Big lol.
removed by mod
But you don’t. Because you don’t
Exactly, that’s the point he was trying to make.
You can’t harden windows to the point of an acceptable level of security. That is the inherent nature of proprietary software.
removed by mod
How do you harden windows?
Prove to me that your windows system is actually “hardened” and that you have no backdoors or telemetry broadcasting at all. At the very least, Microsoft still knows what you are doing, you cannot trust your 3rd party firewall because windows can still sidestep it.
I don’t even know who the fuck those people are, all I can tell you is that there is a reason that any professional application that requires legitimate security, runs on foss systems, or at the very least source available. If you are too stupid to realize that, then you really don’t have any say in this matter whatsoever. It doesn’t even just include baremetal Linux either.
I don’t know who you’ve been arguing with on this, but I actually make a living working on Linux machines, I’m not even coming at you from a freetard perspective, solely work experience.
removed by mod
But you don’t. Because you don’t.
Nobody does. Windows is closed source and its inner working is a trade secret. This means you cannot know how to lock down windows. Of course there are best practices based on info from microsoft or people who know a thing or two about info sec but it’s all guess work and/or trusting the developer by its blue eyes.
removed by mod
Thats something Ive never understood about closed source.
The OS, in its entirety, is on your computer. Why are you not able to open it up and root around within it? Is it just encrypted to a degree it cant be cracked? Or is the legal ramifications of unraveling it just not worth unraveling it?
Imagine claiming to be technically competent and using Windows, being obliged to “lock it down” to made it a “non spyware”. Take your meds, dude.
Imagine being such a dink you know nothing yet you open your mouth.
Oh wait, you don’t need to imagine.
Why would someone who uses Debian care about Windows?
removed by mod
I don’t, because I have better use of my time than to learn to use someone else’s computer
removed by mod
They have a point though.
Windows automatically means you don’t have privacy and you cannot have privacy.
On Linux you at least may or may not, depending on configuration.
removed by mod
removed by mod
removed by mod
BuT bRaVE isN’t ThaT bAd 🤡
I’ve actually been attacked on several occasions by brave fan boys when I casually mentioned that I switched to Firefox and loved it. Idk what their deal is but I find it hilarious that all this stuff is coming out about brave recently 🤣
They’re literally on the payroll. It’s a pyramid scheme.
Yep, this news actually broke a couple days ago, I remember seeing a Brave fanboy having a meltdown over it and ranting about how Mozilla is the real shady company, blah, blah, blah.
The Mozilla foundation is super shady, and some Firefox devs does have it in them to change stuff to piss off people. It doesn’t excuse Brave though.
Please cite an actual source for that claim.
Their public reports were a fair share of the money goes to its administration, were the dev funds are lower each years, were some funded orgs does not seem to exist, with the addition of actual user contribution being a drop in the ocean of money influx, is the source for the “shady” part.
Me (and many other) having long debates on their bugzilla about changes they made that ignore user settings, against all common practices, with no chance of reverting them because they knew better, until some big service (say, gmail) is impacted at which point all their arguments are forgotten and the changes are reverted, for the pissing of people part.
Oh dear lord. What did they say in support of their “Mozilla is shady” argument?
To be fair. Mozilla foundation is shady. They keep pushing things that don’t follow their core mission. That try to expand their brand.
You can use Mozilla to build solid privacy respecting systems, but Firefox out of the box not so much. They’re better than Google, but that’s a low fucking bar.
Mullvad browser, Tor browser, mull for Android - all use the core Firefox open source engine, to make privacy respecting programs that work out of the box with privacy respecting defaults.
So I would say Mozilla is a good guy in this conversation, but not a saint.
They keep trying to make money so they don’t go under if/when Google pulls the plug on their easy money.
Though they are transparent with the fact that they are doing it. I’m not a fan of it either, but it’s not too shady when they’re open about it IMO.
Fair enough, they aren’t evil to be sure.
The Mozilla telemetry, pocket, Mozilla synchronization, experiments, the new tab page basically being an advertisement page. That leaves the sour taste in my mouth, so I don’t trust them because of that… Shady good guy vibes:)
They’re doing what they think they need to justify their existence, and although I personally believe being just a great browser would be enough I appreciate their communication around their ventures. It’s not great, but it’s not like they’re installing malware in the background.
https://itsfoss.com/firefox-looking-glass-controversy/
They get pretty close sometimes. I respect their mojo, but I don’t install vanilla Firefox anymore. On anything. For any reason. I don’t trust them anymore.
I wish them the best, if I could donate directly to Firefox development I would, but it’s impossible with them. So I don’t. I donate to mullvad, I donate to the Tor project, and I donate to servo. That’s what I can do to make sure we maintain an open and free web
And may I point out that just being a great browser hasn’t worked out so well for Firefox so far. Unfortunately in today’s day and age you have to promote yourself to stand out. Chrome is an abject piece of crap that actively spies on you and yet Google’s PR has managed to convince the vast majority to use it.
I dont get why everyone bitches about Pocket, tbh. Ive been a Pocket user for years and Mozilla’s purchase of them has made them better if anything.
I’ve always liked the idea of pocket and have tried to get into using it multiple times but sadly I’m a savage who hates even using bookmarks for some reason. I just keep all of it in my brain (which tends to mean I do not keep it at all).
The problem is Mozilla advertises themselves as this last bastion of privacy but a cursory glance at their own privacy policy makes it very clear that they’re blowing smoke up your ass.
Yes, you can change some settings and add extensions to make it private but out of the box it is anything but.
The sad truth is that, despite being a basic necessity, there are no “good” browsers. It’s very difficult to have a monetization model that is privacy-respecting.
Yes you can use something like Mullvad that is totally privacy-respecting out of the box, but it’s so far down the scale that it will break a lot of sites.
Brave is just the flavor of shit that I choose to eat.
Fair enough. I’m glad it works for you.
For what it’s worth mullvad browser works for all of my use cases, I haven’t found anything it doesn’t work for.
It’s mainly NoScript that breaks sites for me, and there’s no way to disable it.
Actually currently my Mullvad browser is not working at all. I have no idea why. My other 4 browsers continue unfettered but Mullvad won’t load a single webpage.
Plus not being unable to be set as the the default browser means I often forget it’s even there.
You can open up the no script options and click on disable globally.
Sorry to hear mullvad’s not loading anything. Seems like a weird bug
Setting the default browser, is a problem on Windows, there is a workaround I could dig up for you if you want. But basically you have to make a script and then modify the registry to point to that script as the default browser. It’s a pain in the butt but it works. Thankfully on Linux, and Mac OS it just works as the default browser
Probably something about Google.
Yeah if it’s the comment chain that I think they’re referring to, I believe it came down to Mozilla “being in bed with Google” because Google is the default search engine.
I’ll take the default search engine being Google over things like affiliate links being hijacked, but maybe I’m crazy for taking that position.
Typical Brave user hating google while using chrome with preinstalled extensions. Everything about that browser is the opposite of what it should be. Same with the users.
In fairness
- Mozilla pays their CEO a whole lot
- The Fakespot acquisition:
- Dumping a whole bunch of money into a third party add-on with a really bad privacy policy
- The company modified their privacy policy right before the buyout, so Mozilla could own the data they had acquired. (old/new, see section 5C)
- Mozilla is now testing out a version of their browser with the add-on built-in, increasing bloat unnecessarily
Brave’s CEO was fired from Mozilla so Mozilla bad.
don’t you just love projection?
cant accept the facts, so deflect the criticism to something else that is in no way a valid target for them.
I follow Ghacks, a tech site, as well and boy there is a Brave shill on there who attacks everyone there for daring to say anything against it. He knows stuff, judging from his comments, yet is so anti Mozilla and pro Brave that I can’t understand. Almost thinks anyone not using Brave is inferior.
It’s not good to stereotype people. But, I would bet money that they have any three of these: bought
NFCsNFTs unironically, supports OpenAI unconditionally, propose blockchain on everything, bought a pizza with bitcoin years ago that would be millions of dollars today and are still salty about it, have a Starlink receiver, drive a beaten down Tesla they can’t afford to repair because they spent their money paying for FSD early access, and would definitely be first in line to fly Starship to Mars if they were allowed to, they posts to imageai regularly.EDIT: autocorrect.
Yes, that pizza for Bitcoin story is quite popular, though it happened in very early days of the currency. Also, I assume you meant NFTs instead of NFCs :p. For a second, I was wondering what did near field communication had to do with this.
My favorite Brave cope was a guy saying “you can just go to the system tools and remove the services”
Which, while technically true, is also true of malware
Just a reminder, any time you see a “tech” youtuber with brave installed, they’re not going to be an excellent source of information
Brodie Robertson is an excellent source of information ☹️
Except in terms of browser choice apparently. Either they’re ignorant or being paid. Either way it’s not a good sign.
What browser signifies an excellent source of information? Ice weasel? w3m?
Lynx
raw dogging straight html
I have Orion (macOS only for the time being) and it’s sooo good.
The amazing part is that it even works as a daily driver if you’re a not-so-techie person/normal user… but then on top there are all these little extra features and optimizations that make it like Safari if Safari was actually good.
I would at this point a) not be able to go back to either Safari or Firefox (edit: nor Ungoogled Chromium) as well as b) immediately trust an Orion user on most of what they have to say about a “tech” related opinion :D
Based on your comment, I’ve just downloaded Orion to give it a shake. Very much enjoyed the OS X-esque intro video. Took me right back to installing Snow Leopard for the first time.
Sounds interesting. I’d thought I’d heard of all the browsers that exist lol. Gonna give it a spin .
Wow, Orion is pretty slick! And Orion+ doesn’t offer any actual features aside from early access and input on the roadmap. So far so good. Custom buttons is really cool, built in tree style tabs is slick. Also!! orion has workspaces that are as good if not better than vivaldi’s! This is really slick, thanks for sharing
I don’t like brave because Brandon Eich (CEO, formerly with Mozilla) doesn’t support gay marriage and was pushing anti-vax stuff on twitter. I don’t look for this shit to titillate my tits like some folks, but when it hits me in the face I can’t ignore it.
When fact checking myself I found even more controversies, but I’m not wasting time reading articles that feed a confirmation bias.
It’s crazy to me that people ever thought brave was “privacy focused” when it was clear that they were trying to jump on the crypto bandwagon with their own in-network crypto and ad network. It was always just a reskinned chrome with ublock built in and then their crypto and ad network tacked on top
I don’t like Brave because they’ve done dodgy things like this time and time again over the years, and each time Brandon Eich went on a marketing campaign across social media to drum up new users and drown the story out.
He’s also the creator of JavaScript if that irks you any more.
it does
Why is installing a VPN considered bad? Is it because it is done without user consent? I don’t understand if there is any malicious intent.
It’s “all your mail is now redirected to a third party that makes money by mining it for data without you knowing” level of nastiness. Absolutely deplorable and a reason to never touch anything made by the people behind Brave even with a ten foot pole. Brave is a scam and why people pretend its not is beyond me.
deleted by creator
They’re apprehending ALL of your browsing activity to their lucky vpn provider of choice.
that’s what the new outlook ‘app’ (replacing win 10/11’s mail ‘app’) does with gmail accounts. routes all your mail from gmail through microsoft servers before delivering to the app on your pc.
a service has far more privs on the system than a browser should have or need (which can be installed on a per-user basis, no admin/root required).
Because a vpn can monitor all the websites that you visit. Not directly what you’re looking at, but definitely where you’re looking. Just line your provider can, if you’re not using a vpn. But at least with your provider, you have a contract with them - you pay them to transport your data and nothing more. Some very scummy providers aside, that’s where it stops.
A free vpn, however, needs to pay for transporting your data somehow. And if you’re not paying for it with money, then who/what is?
See also Tom Scott’s explanation about vpns, why you probably don’t need one, and why he refused their advertisement money.
deleted by creator
I’m interested to hear what you think a vpn will protect you against. Or what you think the flaws in Toms arguments are.
Edit: I don’t know about you, but I trust my own, GDPR-backed isp far, far more than I trust whichever foreign based vpn company. Especially if they for it for free or cheap.
deleted by creator
The only thing you’re “protecting” yourself from by using a vpn to surf the Internet, is your own provider. It won’t stop any spying software on your phone, or any nefarious scripts on the websites you visit.
Tom’s argument was more nuanced than that, which is why I linked it. I suggest you watch it and explain where he’s wrong if you want to give your argument to ignore him any weight. Ad hominems and “imagined” arguments alone won’t get you very far, I’m afraid.
I actually work in cyber security and I was really happy Tom Scott released that video. VPN companies are some of the scummiest companies out there, and their rampant sponsorships on YouTube were shameless misinformation and fear mongering in order to scare you into giving all your internet traffic to them. Seeing so many sellout tech YouTubers take their sponsorships despite knowing better COUGH NetworkChuck, was one of my biggest pet peeves.
There are seemingly legit VPN companies out there, and there are some legitimate use cases for them, but what Tom is addressing are the shady ones that lie to you about what they’re for and how they help you for their own monetary and in some cases data mining benefit. In most cases you do not need a VPN, and it doesn’t do anything to protect you from “internet criminals”, or provide extra “security” and it only “protects” your privacy by shifting the for-profit company that gets to see all the websites you visit.
I too would like to know why you think a VPN is needed “on today’s web”, I would bet money it came directly out of one of theirs ads scripts.
deleted by creator
When I’m away from home, I use my own Wireguard VPN back into my private network, where all of my traffic is filtered.
That’s your own VPN, not a commercial VPN service and you’re using that for what I would assume is DNS filtering. Thats entirely unrelated to what a commercial VPN service does and what Tom Scott’s video is about. And that’s not even a benefit of your VPN, your VPN is just a tool you’re using for remote access to your DNS filter/server which is what’s actually providing you that service. I could do the same exact thing with a recursive DNS server and Pihole using DOH without a VPN at all.
I use a VPN for my job as well, and it isn’t to protect company products (we don’t make a product). It’s to keep prying eyes out.
That is again an entirely different use case and product than what a commercial VPN service is offering. That’s not even for privacy, it’s for secure remote access to your company network.
I’m sorry, but when my wife and kid’s phones are showing them ads for things we talked about 5 minutes ago, they appear horrified by it. Then they move along like nothing happened. That’s the typical user.
That’s not a problem a VPN service solves.
I will continue to not be spied on 24/7 by corporations and my government.
With a VPN service like ProtonVPN, all you’re doing is changing the corporation that can see which sites you visit from your ISP, to Proton. It isn’t inherently any more private or secure, you’re just choosing which corporation you allow the ability to spy on you.
I don’t remember if I saw that video from Tom Scott or not, but I imagine his argument was along the lines of, “if you aren’t doing anything nefarious or you don’t live in a nation state that censors you, then you have nothing to worry about”.
No, his argument was that outside of spoofing your location, and hiding which sites you visit from your ISP specifically, VPN services don’t provide the average consumer with any additional benefit over what you get for free by default due to the wonderful inventions of TLS, and HSTS. The point is that VPN service companies use scare tactics to get you to purchase a product you don’t need to solve problems you don’t have. NetworkChuck made a whole sponsored video about how somebody can man-in-the-middle you at a coffee shop to steal your credit card information to demonstrate the effectiveness of a VPN service and the attack he demonstrated was literally impossible. He created a fake, non-real world scenario straight out of 2003 to deceive the less tech literate public in order to shill a VPN service.
Tom Scott provided a fantastic public service by educating people on what a VPN actually DOES and what it DOESN’T DO. So people can actually make a decision as to whether they need one due to the facts, not misinformation and false advertisement. You on the other hand still can’t seem to articulate what exactly you think a VPN services does for you and how it does it. You have a lot of buzzwords and vague statements about “being spied on”, and never actually said why you think commercial VPN products should be used by the average user “On todays web”.
I doubt either one of you will ever hear from them. I guess they haven’t even watched the video to begin with.
deleted by creator
I’m sorry you felt the need to denounce claims in videos while openly admitting you don’t even know what the claims are.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Tom Scott’s explanation about vpns
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It’s not even free, the service itself is a payed subscription. But it’s there and it could be working and funneling data without the user knowing it if they wanted to.
I agree with what other people said. And here’s a new twist.
Any software that messes with the networking stack, can cause really difficult to debug errors. And it may induce errors in other programs. The more complicated your computer’s networking, the more fragile it is.
So introducing, silently, unasked for, network drivers and VPN hooks into the operating system is harming the compute stability of their user base.
At the very least, it should be opt-in! There should be a dialogue asking hey we have this new awesome feature, click okay to install it, something like that. Informed consent
Brave browser has been automatically installing VPN services on Windows computers without user consent, but it remains inactive unless the user subscribes.
They’re installing extra software that’s useless unless you give them money. Plus you really want to be aware of your VPN since all your traffic will be going through it.
It doesn’t auto enable and chromium also gives you a lot of unnecessary features. While I think Brave is bloat I don’t see how this is any more than the usual.
So what?
Are people upset about this? I honestly don’t understand.
I honestly don’t understand someone that would accept anything from a stranger.
You member U2 and the forced album through iTunes?
No, I have no idea what you’re talking about.
But I still don’t understand why people would make a big deal about a piece of software that installs multiple software packages…
I mean have you ever installed Microsoft office? Did you ask it to install Microsoft access? What does Microsoft access even do?
Or have you ever installed nvidia drivers? Did you ask for the whole “GeForce experience”? Wtf does that even mean?
Installing extra software packages is definitely par for the course, bit in the brave example, at least the extra shit isn’t required for the main app to work, in fact it’s disabled by default, that’s great!
To answer your original question: yes I do think people are genuinely upset with this.
If you take your office installation example, you’re installing a suite of applications. You’re not just installing excel, you’re installing the office suite so you’re bound to get all the applications in the suite.
Meanwhile, this would be like installing the office suite and getting a service installed along with it, that can monitor outgoing network traffic without them saying anything about it.
The main two reasons I’d be upset with this if I used brave was: They installed it without saying anything and It’s something that’s inherently a privacy and security risk. Even if brave themselves don’t do anything malicious with it, doesn’t mean that someone who’s found a potential exploit in the VPN service won’t.
Also just as an aside, I also absolutely despise “GeForce Experience” and there are ways to fetch the drivers as standalone packages without getting the telemetry spyware installed alongside them.
It’s something that’s inherently a privacy and security risk. Even if brave themselves don’t do anything malicious with it, doesn’t mean that someone who’s found a potential exploit in the VPN service won’t.
Ok, well a vpn is a potential security improvement if anything… But regardless, it’s off, it’s disabled, unusable unless you’re paying for it. I mean just for perspective, any browser is much more of an inherent security risk than a VPN app sitting dormant and inactive.
But you’re right that users never asked for it, so I get that part.
A VPN is only as much of a security improvement as the service behind it. If it gets installed in a shady way, how much trust can you put into the service?
This was my point exactly. A VPN may just as well be used to spy on your traffic rather than secure it. And that’s why I’d be upset, personally: because I don’t trust brave or the company behind it.
But I think the main thing people are up in arms about is the fact that they didn’t ask for it. :)
deleted by creator
