|
|
|
|
|
by yupyupyups
267 days ago
|
|
Calling Brave "best-in-class for resisting fingerprinting" is quite bold. Especially when it's so easily disproven. Try some good fingerprint testing sites on Brave and see what comes up (those results alone should chock you). Then try the same sites on Firefox with privacy.resistFingerprinting=true. Unless some truly revolutionary initiatives have been taken at Brave since last I checked, you will see Firefox do A LOT better than Brave. Brave suck at resisting fingerprinting. It may be better than other Chromium-based browsers, but it's still pathetic. |
|
Um. Have you tried this? Because obviously based on my comment I've done this before (and I've of course included Firefox).
I just did this again and sites tell me Brave has a randomized fingerprint. Firefox's is "unique". A specific example: the EFF Cover Your Tracks website[1] said that both browsers convey 18.21 bits of identifying information.
Additionally, if you need to enable a certain setting for best performance, that browser is obviously worse for purpose, given that the vast majority of people don't change settings.
[1] https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/