• Norgur
    link
    fedilink
    269 months ago

    Okay, this article makes it sound like they found some hidden thing deep in obscure windows settings about brave doing something bad.

    On truth, they just installed Windows Services for their VPN to enable users to use the service. That’s what many apps do for dozens of reasons.

    I dislike Brave as much as the next guy, but let’s stick to things they really fuck up and not make Up issues that aren’t there.

    • @jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      As somebody who routinely checks their window services looking for rogue applications adding yet another background service. It’s not cool. I don’t expect my browser to have a background service. Chrome has a background service updater in Windows. That’s terrible too.

    • krellor
      link
      fedilink
      49 months ago

      I agree it is people looking for reasons to criticize. However, I do think VPN or anything that modifies your route tables should be subjected to more scrutiny than other app features due to potential for abuse. I wish browsers wouldn’t bundle them at all, or install them as part of their base.

  • @glad_cat@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    159 months ago

    The same company that was modifying the content of the pages as an opt-out feature deeply hidden in the setting? (e.g. bitcoin stuff on every Reddit link)

  • @jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    109 months ago

    This is my shocked face, the company with a history of ignoring user agency and doing shady shit… Does some shady shit and ignores user agency.

  • Vincent
    link
    fedilink
    79 months ago

    Well, there’s a way to frame this as malicious. I’m not a fan of Brave, but it also installs, say, a spell checker without consent, or a Tor client. Sure, the code is there even if you don’t use it, but… What’s the actual harm?

    • @glad_cat@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      39 months ago

      The harm is that it’s installed. There is no reason for doing this. It can be done on demand in one second if the user subscribes to their VPN.

      It also shows once once again that they keep on doing their shady shit and still cannot be trusted (or at least that they are a bunch of incompetent developers).

      • DarkenLM
        link
        fedilink
        39 months ago

        You know Firefox installs a bunch of stuff by default as well, right?

      • Vincent
        link
        fedilink
        29 months ago

        I mean, yes, it could’ve been differently, and as I understand it they’re going to. But as a user, how is your life worse with this than without this? What’s the impact of something being installed but not running?

  • Teon
    link
    fedilink
    79 months ago

    You get what you deserve if you use Brave. It will only get worse.

  • @governorkeagan@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I’m clearly out of the loop with the hate towards Brave. Why all the hate? Also, if it’s hated so much why is it still recommended on Privacy Guides?

    EDIT Thank you for all the informative responses!

    • Ghazi
      link
      fedilink
      49 months ago

      @governorkeagan @throws_lemy Privacy Guides has a set of objective criteria to judge a browser’s security and privacy. People tend to hate Brave for reasons unrelated to security and privacy. Like the CEO’s politics, crypto (and recently AI) integration in the browser, some shady history about injecting referral codes, etc.
      Personally, I wish I could find an alternative that is as good as Brave. Until then, I’ll keep using it as it is perfect for my needs.