Unfortunately I'm stuck with Chrome at work so having something like Ublock Lite available is somewhat helpful. I just hope it still blocks youtube ads because they're the worst.
I am running a portable LibreWolf on my work issued, locked-down-with-a-chastity-belt-and-thrown-the-keys-into-the-fires-of-Mount-Doom-in-Mordor laptop with uBlock extension installed.
Did they mention external device access? I only see a mention of portable LibreWolf which I assume is referring to the “can just be ran from a folder dropped anywhere on the filesystem” version of portable, not necessarily that it’s an external device.
This sort of exaggeration is typically used for comedic effect. Sorry for trying to throw a smile on a random person’s face. You must be very fun to hang around at parties.
I consider browser ab blocking a reasonable accomodation for ADHD and I'm not even joking. I haven't had to ask for this yet but, seriously. Banner ads are extremely distracting.
We handle a lot of IP so I can't install anything on the PC that isn't pre-approved (like MS Teams). I am able to add certain extensions like Ublock but not others like Keepa (Amazon price tracker).
My company enforces specific add-ons for Firefox so I installed and use LibreWolf which our admins don’t lock down - only Chrome and Firefox. I wanted a browser that I would use separately from my work that didn’t specifically need their add-ons which include traffic sniffing crap. I know that if I want to do any personal browsing and guarantee it’s personal, I should use my own device but I was honestly just annoyed by the additional CPU cycles the security add-ons were using.
it seems to work on youtube so far, but that could also be due to the previous custom filters I installed months ago when yt ramped up their "no adblocker" campaign. UBO still works in the sense that all of the filters and lists you've installed are still there and functioning, you just can't update the extension. I'm still running UBO alongside UBO lite and it's working fine for now (knock on wood) until I can afford a new Windows machine.
when I swapped my laptops, I already had chrome on the newer ones which I'm still using, but when I heard about this ublock origin saga, I started putting all my passwords in protonpass, and customised my Firefox install to my liking, CSS and everything. All ready to switch now, and I'm gonna be thanking my past self profusely for actually choosing to switch instead of vegetating.
I installed Brave earlier this week and that's mostly true. There's some built in stuff that will show by default, notably the toolbar buttons and the notification style alert on the new tab page for one of those things mentioned, but you can just close the notification and remove the toolbar buttons and you're set.
That said, I think it's still in the data monetization market like Alphabet with anonymized tokens, though I don't remember the details.
good point, i think this feature just makes it easier to access TOR domain sites without an extra browser rather than being the anonymity tool that TOR browser is
No. Brave has a history of modifying links you click on to add affiliate information. The only time to use Brave is if user agent spoofing for "chrome only" websites doesn't make it work.
Right, but I don't trust them as a result and I don't feel comfortable recommending them or not pointing it out. Meddling with links you click is malware behavior.
Also the recent case when they installed VPN. In general, they give off the impression that they don't respect users' consent a lot. Mozilla has been similarly sneaky, like with the opt-out ad tracking recently - thus I would only consider Librewolf or hardening - but Brave seems to be more extreme in their advertising business.
the VPN was a feature of the software at the time and not enabled unless you signed up but as you point out if software changes its service without explicitly telling users these days it feels bad
Welll yeah - point was that they installed a service without consent. And not just a browser feature, but something crossing a whole another boundary. AFAIK also, while the tunnel itself was not enabled, the service itself was turned on automatically.
according to the minutes of research i did ;-) i got the impression the service was disabled by default. i don't know the tech details otherwise so i don't know if it made the system vulnerable or unstable in any way. i didn't find anything like that.
more to the point is that they should have said that VPN resources were being installed