Forgetful Browsing(brave.com)
brave.com
Forgetful Browsing
https://brave.com/privacy-updates/25-forgetful-browsing/
50 comments
While I'm not sure about the privacy advantages, setting network.dnsCacheEntries to 0 will prevent firefox from caching dns.
There's no appreciable difference in response time on my setup, it just hits the local dnscrypt-proxy cache instead.
There's no appreciable difference in response time on my setup, it just hits the local dnscrypt-proxy cache instead.
I really want Brave to succeed, and I like where they're going - but temporary containers still seems like a superior approach in pretty much every way.
I've been using Brave as my daily driver for a while now. I like it. I understand people don't like crypto blah blah blah but you don't have to use it.
I am so used to seeing websites rendered in Brave (both mobile and desktop), that whenever I am forced to use a standard Chrome/Edge/Firefox I am appalled at the experience. The ad bombardment is unrelenting, and I my mental reflexes to tune them out have atrophied to the point where I don't understand how anyone can use the web with a "normal" browser.
The crypto stuff I just ignore.
Very occasionally a web site will break in Brave but work in Chrome, but those instances are converging to zero based on about 5 years of use.
The crypto stuff I just ignore.
Very occasionally a web site will break in Brave but work in Chrome, but those instances are converging to zero based on about 5 years of use.
> I don't understand how anyone can use the web with a "normal" browser.
uBlock Origin and Sponsor Block work fine for me. Some use pi-hole or a similar DNS-based solution (I use dns.adguard.com on my phone.)
uBlock Origin and Sponsor Block work fine for me. Some use pi-hole or a similar DNS-based solution (I use dns.adguard.com on my phone.)
I should have specified "normal browsers out of the box."
I've considered setting up a pi-hole at home but never got around to it. Same with browser extensions... Getting the ad blocking without additional effort appeals to my lazy self. :)
I've considered setting up a pi-hole at home but never got around to it. Same with browser extensions... Getting the ad blocking without additional effort appeals to my lazy self. :)
Spending a few minutes downloading, installing, and setting up a new browser is so much quicker than installing an ad blocker in 5 seconds. I believe it
Switching to a new browser seems like far more effort than installing uBlock Origin, and has much further-reaching security/trust ramifications, but to each their own. :)
Me too. I mean I use several browsers at the same time, but Brave has become the "main" browser I use for all my personal browsing (work shit, I leave in Chrome).
But the thing is I don't like Brave, either. I don't like the crypto, and I don't like the business model (replace websites' chosen ads with their own ads). And, in that way we judge people whom we don't know personally based on the set of things we do know about them, I don't like Brandon Eich.
Nevertheless, for around a year and counting, I use Brave the most because it's just the best browser. It's fast, and blocks a lot more of the shit I don't ever want to see in my browser without me having to configure anything. (I will note that I do have to turn off all sorts of annoying shit in Brave, like the news and the crypto and the "better" ads, but you only have to do that one time and then it syncs across your other devices.)
It's funny to me that for web browsers today, blocking things has become arguably more important than rendering things, but there it is.
They were the first browser AFAIK to build in blocking for those cunty "we had to smear our web page with feces because of mean old Europe and their GDPR, please please click this to give us permission to let our advertising cabal spy on you using your own hardware" notices.
This is another one in that vein. Allowing any and all "unwanted first-party reidentification" is a nonsense default. I get how it happened, that it wasn't designed for the surveillance capitalist hellscape that the web has become, but whatever; inverting the default on that is definitely how I want my browser on my computer to behave.
More like this, please.
But the thing is I don't like Brave, either. I don't like the crypto, and I don't like the business model (replace websites' chosen ads with their own ads). And, in that way we judge people whom we don't know personally based on the set of things we do know about them, I don't like Brandon Eich.
Nevertheless, for around a year and counting, I use Brave the most because it's just the best browser. It's fast, and blocks a lot more of the shit I don't ever want to see in my browser without me having to configure anything. (I will note that I do have to turn off all sorts of annoying shit in Brave, like the news and the crypto and the "better" ads, but you only have to do that one time and then it syncs across your other devices.)
It's funny to me that for web browsers today, blocking things has become arguably more important than rendering things, but there it is.
They were the first browser AFAIK to build in blocking for those cunty "we had to smear our web page with feces because of mean old Europe and their GDPR, please please click this to give us permission to let our advertising cabal spy on you using your own hardware" notices.
This is another one in that vein. Allowing any and all "unwanted first-party reidentification" is a nonsense default. I get how it happened, that it wasn't designed for the surveillance capitalist hellscape that the web has become, but whatever; inverting the default on that is definitely how I want my browser on my computer to behave.
More like this, please.
"replace websites' chosen ads with their own ads"
We've never done this. Why do you think we did or would?
We've never done this. Why do you think we did or would?
Semantic difference.
Brave takes away ads from pages.
Then, it shows other ads in other ways:
https://brave.com/brave-rewards/ https://brave.com/brave-ads/ad-formats/
So while the statement that it "replaces ads with their own ads" is technically false (the ads are not injected into the web sites in place of the blocked ones), it's still a sloppy but mostly correct way of pointing out that the business incentive behind Brave's ad blocking means that the goal isn't abolish ads as a concept altogether. The point is still to show ads if companies want to pay for it.
Brave takes away ads from pages.
Then, it shows other ads in other ways:
https://brave.com/brave-rewards/ https://brave.com/brave-ads/ad-formats/
So while the statement that it "replaces ads with their own ads" is technically false (the ads are not injected into the web sites in place of the blocked ones), it's still a sloppy but mostly correct way of pointing out that the business incentive behind Brave's ad blocking means that the goal isn't abolish ads as a concept altogether. The point is still to show ads if companies want to pay for it.
Unrelated general request: Please consider looking into the functionality of "I still don't care about cookies", as it blocks more cookie notices than Brave, including Google.
Also website redirects would be great for the Desktop Browser (reddit to old reddit, twitter to nitter, etc.), similar to your iOS feature.
Also website redirects would be great for the Desktop Browser (reddit to old reddit, twitter to nitter, etc.), similar to your iOS feature.
Same here. I spread my web browsing between a handful of browsers, but when I want things to “just work”, Brave is my go-to.
It was weird to me that opening this link in my mobile Brave browser opened it at a zoom level where I had to scroll side-to-side.
If you're only going to check one thing, shouldn't it be how your own browser loads your site if you're a browser company?
If you're only going to check one thing, shouldn't it be how your own browser loads your site if you're a browser company?
That was my bad :(
I forgot the "w-full" class on the Shields image. I set the "max-w-md" class alone, which sounds like it's supposed to prevent the image from being wider than the viewport itself, but that isn't the case.
Apologies.
I forgot the "w-full" class on the Shields image. I set the "max-w-md" class alone, which sounds like it's supposed to prevent the image from being wider than the viewport itself, but that isn't the case.
Apologies.
I noticed the same thing.
It’s great to see innovation in the browser space. Brave has (sort of shoddy, but I think WIP) support for vertical tabs now so I am using it more. As with all browsers just go through the settings on first install and turn off a bunch of stuff, ex. the crypto/rewards stuff (unless you like that sort of thing) and it’s a pretty good browsing experience.
Their search is decent too, has a little section surfacing forum results which is sometimes helpful, and Goggles which I’ve been meaning to use more.
Also the ‘Open in new window with Tor’ is pretty neat
Their search is decent too, has a little section surfacing forum results which is sometimes helpful, and Goggles which I’ve been meaning to use more.
Also the ‘Open in new window with Tor’ is pretty neat
Hasn't been all that shoddy on beta/nightly branches for me, can't speak for stable.
If you ask me, it can't get better than a properly setup firefox
https://librewolf.net/docs/features/
https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js -- If you're constrained using ff
https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js -- If you're constrained using ff
I was thinking the same thing. I'm pretty sure Librewolf already got this covered, and even it doesn't, it can still be easily done.
Librewolf isn't a mainstream browsers, and it breaks a ton of stuff.
How do you balance using Librewolf default cookie blocking with high frequency sites like email/social media/bank accounts? I find there's a convenience with being logged into some of these sites like the Brave article discusses, instead of having to log in from scratch multiple times a day
Or do you never enable cookies? Just curious
Or do you never enable cookies? Just curious
Super glad to see this!
Given how simple, trustable, and verifiable it is for the browser to simply enforce the user's 'privacy' preferences by means of dropping unwanted cookies on the ground as soon as the user leaves the site, I am irritated that this wasn't the solution arrived upon many years ago instead of the asinine "This site uses cookies, allow?" warnings that GDPR and CCPA brought upon us. Those, by contrast, are (allegedly) trying to solve a problem inside the website context itself, despite the fact that the APIs they need to use for actually managing cookies are archaic and limited, and also despite the fact that they actually have to remember you to remember your so-called "cookie preferences."
A cookie shouldn't be mentally-modeled like a tattoo, it should be modeled like a leaflet you're handed on the street. You can ignore it, or you can pretend to take it and dispose of it immediately or as soon as you leave. This is the way it should be.
Given how simple, trustable, and verifiable it is for the browser to simply enforce the user's 'privacy' preferences by means of dropping unwanted cookies on the ground as soon as the user leaves the site, I am irritated that this wasn't the solution arrived upon many years ago instead of the asinine "This site uses cookies, allow?" warnings that GDPR and CCPA brought upon us. Those, by contrast, are (allegedly) trying to solve a problem inside the website context itself, despite the fact that the APIs they need to use for actually managing cookies are archaic and limited, and also despite the fact that they actually have to remember you to remember your so-called "cookie preferences."
A cookie shouldn't be mentally-modeled like a tattoo, it should be modeled like a leaflet you're handed on the street. You can ignore it, or you can pretend to take it and dispose of it immediately or as soon as you leave. This is the way it should be.
Every. Single. Time. I open a Stackoverflow link, they ask me about cookies. Because my browser dumps them, I know, I know, but so irritating.
In most ad-blockers you can use the Block Element feature to find and block that element and it should be remembered between visits.
Most of the nefarious tracking is taking place via canvas fingerprinting these days, clearing cookies does nothing but make the unaware user feel good they're "doing something".
Care to elaborate?
https://browserleaks.com/canvas
Open it in a regular and "incognito" browser tab. This is a long term identifier of your browser which persists across cookie clearing, IP address changes and other ritualistic totems privacy-seeking individuals still inexplicably cling to.
Open it in a regular and "incognito" browser tab. This is a long term identifier of your browser which persists across cookie clearing, IP address changes and other ritualistic totems privacy-seeking individuals still inexplicably cling to.
How do one protect against this?
Simply don't allow Javascript.
Unfortunately, even that might not be enough these days with newer fingerprinting methods.
This sounds nice. Since it is incorporated to the Brave Shield, it should be synced across browsers, I think? That would solve the major issue blocking me from using Cookies Auto Delete -- I would have stuff added on one device, then I forgot to export it to my synced folder to import on another device, and I start to lose track about which stuff aren't on which device's list yet.
Brave being able to sync my no JavaScript, block Image, and block Cookies list is why I'm basically "locked-in" to Brave. I don't like its crypto stuff, but I don't see any of the other incorporating as many accessible privacy options that syncs across device as Brave does. I really wish Firefox, or even Vivaldi, would do it because I really don't like the crypto stuff, but I really like almost everything else Brave does.
Brave being able to sync my no JavaScript, block Image, and block Cookies list is why I'm basically "locked-in" to Brave. I don't like its crypto stuff, but I don't see any of the other incorporating as many accessible privacy options that syncs across device as Brave does. I really wish Firefox, or even Vivaldi, would do it because I really don't like the crypto stuff, but I really like almost everything else Brave does.
This is great and the right direction for the web. But it’s also gonna make it really hard for websites to use analytics tools and understand their customer’s behaviors. Not all websites are predatory, some companies just genuinely want to better understand their clients.
I wonder what alternatives could emerge to provide privacy-protecting analytics? Any ideas?
The best option is to respect clients privacy and don't collect data about them.
You could simply ask your visitors.
Not affiliated with Brave, simply found it interesting.
I'm not clear on how this differs from private browsing (incognito, or whatever) other than retaining a history entry of the visit. I'm all for users having more options in how they browse, but is there more to this feature than I'm seeing?
I think the idea is that, rather than waiting until the tab is closed to clear the entire session, as you navigate away from ABC.com to XYZ.com, cookies from ABC.com are cleared
I know a student who was ambushed by admin because they wanted to get his phone before he locked it. It worked, they snooped his social media and used the info to harass his friends.
I don't know the specific state his phone was in when they nabbed it, but it's conceivable that this could've helped him.
I don't know the specific state his phone was in when they nabbed it, but it's conceivable that this could've helped him.
I use Firefox mostly, but my settings are like this. No history or cookies saved between sessions. Caches cleared when I close the browser. Search suggestions disabled.
I use the Cookie AutoDelete extension with Firefox.
I'm unclear about how this differs from chrome://settings/cookies
I have Chrome set the block third-party cookies and to clear cookies and site data when you close all windows. Then I have a list of about 20 sites that can always use cookies (where I want to remain logged in), and a list of a half dozen sites that can never use cookies.
I have Chrome set the block third-party cookies and to clear cookies and site data when you close all windows. Then I have a list of about 20 sites that can always use cookies (where I want to remain logged in), and a list of a half dozen sites that can never use cookies.
it clears without needing a full cycle, which is more notable for mobile browsers — which persist session information across restarts of the app — and for desktop browsers which do the same
It sucks because Firefox is the only browser that has autoscroll on Linux and proper tab sync between devices. Meanwhile, Brave is much faster and isn’t a horrible experience on iOS. So I end up using Firefox on my computers, brave on my phone, and manually bookmark syncing to keep it together.
There are autoscroll extensions for Chrome based browsers that with fine with Linux
I use Firefox as my primary browser with Temporary Containers [1] and Cookie AutoDelete [2] (configured to clear local storage too). This combination does not handle DNS cache, but it does keep each tab separate (in Brave’s forgetful browsing, this is by site).
Brave makes it easier to choose Forgetful Browsing, though I just say that the toggle for this should be out in Shields instead of being hidden under Advanced controls. Most people who can figure this out and use it may probably be able to use Firefox and extensions as well. But the friction is a bit higher it’s Firefox and configuring different extensions. Brave should focus on eliminating this friction wherever possible so that the features are discoverable.
I keep Brave handy on my systems even though its not what I use the most. These innovations tilt the balance for me (on some of the negative steps Brave took with respect to ads).
[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...
[2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode...