• Madis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      The same approach would make sense in Firefox too though. And as far as I know, Firefox’s equivalent option is still about:config-only anyway.

    • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I would never use a browser provided by a company that dabbles in cryptocurrencies. Would you entrust your privacy to Sam Bankman-Fried?

  • catonwheels@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Shame I was few used it but I think it is interesting that people actually reporting issues and seems to be expected to fix.

    I simply would just use a step down in security, that’s why I am using brave in first place. Oh don’t run my no script Firefox, oh don’t run on Librewolf. Guess I try brave now. Oh don’t work striked guess standard it is

    Not to mention that people have telemetric on. Because I don’t think most that willing to have websites break for security would like telemetric on.

    • LWD@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, that’s really flawed reasoning on their part. The sort of people who disable Brave’s telemetry (which cannot do anything more than promise privacy, even if true) are the sort of people who would use other enhanced privacy settings!

  • fᵣₑfᵢ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    If you’re interested in a browser with strong fingerprinting protection out-of-the-box, I recommend the Mullvad browser

    It’s desktop only tho