Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonathansampson | Hacker News Reader

Not a 1-to-1 parity at this time, but Brave offers parallel profiles. You can have one running personal interests, while the other has professional interests. Each profile is able to host a unique session for Facebook, etc. Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.

View on HN

That creates a new window per Profile as opposed to just one window with a bunch of tabs, all conceivably in using their own Container, right?

How do you juggle multiple facebook / google / anything accounts in that sort of system?

Each container can be colour coded (up to 8 colours) and each tab is underscored with the same colour, so you can immediately see which is which.

The containers can be named and color coded. Also there are keyboard shortcuts which once learned makes it easier to switch.

> Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.

Is that similar to First Party Isolation in Firefox?

I suspect so, but don't know the details of FPI in Firefox. We don't permit cookies and storage access by third-parties, while also blocking known bad-actors entirely. We also "farble" APIs to create noise for those who do have access. If there are any specific scenarios or questions you have in mind, I'd be happy to discuss further.

Would Brave's parallel profiles allow me to be signed in to 2 different AWS accounts?

I've tried this in Multi-Account Containers for Firefox and SessionBox in Chrome, and they're both pretty buggy, e.g. the console's username menu indicates I'm in account "A", but I'm seeing resources listed from account "B", or EC2 will work fine but clicking over to ECS prompt me to sign in again.

Correct; your AWS session would be scoped to your profile. You could be using your own personal account in the "Personal" profile, and your professional/corporate account in your "Work" profile.

I use Firefox containers to be logged into 3 AWS accounts and works fine for me.

> We also "farble" APIs to create noise for those who do have access

Does this effectively do the same as the 'Canvasblocker' extension does for Firefox?

Maybe; I'm not super familiar with Canvas Blocker. One thing you have to be careful with when blocking APIs is that you don't generate a negative fingerprint by your restrictions, which is every bit as effective as a positive fingerprint would be. Our farbling is pretty good, and will be getting even better later this month :)

Despite its name, Canvasblocker actually does that, it sends slightly shifted API data, not only for canvas but for most fingerprinting methods.

Nonetheless I'm happy to hear about the improvements in Brave. I've actually shifted from Firefox to Brave since I'm expecting Webkit/Blink to become a 'Linux kernel' for web technologies and thus the web.

Keep up the great work! The only true remaining nitpicks I still have with Brave (after the introduction of Sync V2) are

1. iOS Brave being based on Firefox instead of Chrome iOS (I am aware of the technical cost of switching codebase)

2. Prevent browser close on last tab close

If those two existed Brave would be perfect for me.

I don't think it's the same. There is a list of things that Firefox isolates per-domain here [1], it's much more than cookies. There is a Brave ticket here but not much has happened: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/1053

[1] https://2019.www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser/design/#...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com