Hacker News Reader

Comment by FillardMillmore | Hacker News Reader

I am an enthusiastic Brave user - but seeing stories like these make me wonder if I'd be better off configuring Firefox to be more secure/private and using that.

As a privacy and transparency advocate, it disappoints me to see Brave fail to pass the test, especially considering that privacy and transparency are supposed to be the browser's MO.

View on HN

What makes you think brave is better for privacy and transparency in the first place?

Everything I've seen about brave sounds like something that can be done better with extensions within firefox, just with some added crypto/privacy hype BS added on top.

The fact that it is built-in makes me think the browser vendor (Brave) cares more about this issue. Does that not seem like a reasonable assumption?

Presumably it's not built-in to Firefox because if it was, Google might pull the lucrative default search engine deal that they have.

Not too difficult to configure Firefox imo. My recommendations on plugins:

* HTTPS Everywhere: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/https-everywh... * DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/duckduckgo-fo... * uBlock Origin Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...

Privacy Badger[0] too. Multi-account containers[1]. I also agree with the Decentraleyes[2] suggestion.

[0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badge...

[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

[2] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/decentraleyes...

I'd also suggest DeventralEyes, it's a nice quiet extension but works fantastic.

Firefox is too slow for me, so I'm stuck with Brave

De-Googled Chromium with an adblocker is the correct choice, in that case.

Yes, you would be much better off doing that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com