No user browsing data ever reaches the company behind Brave or any middle men, but don’t let facts get in your way, buddy. Ads are being served locally, and by default no ads show up, one has to consciously decide to us that: Brave doesn’t have an “ad server” (in the sense that user data would be transmitted to a remote server). Oh please, we have been through that already. > to protects its own – as Browser disguised – ad-server against other competitors on the market. ![]() I seriously don’t see the contradiction in this sentence. €” Brave CEO Brendan Eich on a Privacy-by-Default Future for Digital AdvertisingĪd lovers are welcome to have a ride on his Brave new Trojan the “privacy-focused browser†blocks invasive ads and trackers Ad views are tallied using an anonymous PrivacyPass protocol, for high authenticity, and even multi-step attribution from start of research to high-end product buy, but with anonymity until the user chooses to sign in or identify while buying. All of these feeds inform the agent so it can pick the best user ad from a catalog that all users in a large region download and update without identifying themselves. For behavior targeting, our approach uses an in-browser agent that studies all the valuable data feeds in every browser: navigation, search queries, ecommerce form filling and submitting, page views and visibility known in fraud-free terms by the browser’s rendering engine. We believe in contextual advertising but do not stop there. Just how Brendan’s new “Privacy-by-Default Future” operates, in his own words: Note that in this case, the “privacy-focused browser” blocks invasive ads and trackers to protects its own – as Browser disguised – ad-server against other competitors on the market. > Note that in this case, the browser itself actually protects you PS: As has pointed out, Brave will do something about that: Note that in this case, the browser itself actually protects you, this is not at all the case with Firefox. Firefox itself doesn’t protect you from anything, it allows better protection, but by itself it does nothing. Well, but I do agree that it is an advantage of uBlock Origin!? I am just wondering why this suddenly makes Firefox any good, most Firefox installations don’t have uBlock Origin installed. > You’ll have to agree with that whatever painful it is for you two and for any similarly casualness minds. And Brave will do something about it, as well. Plus, there are better and more effective ways to achieve this, which are not reliant on browsers. ![]() In how far this is an advantage for a Firefox installation without uBlock Origin (the vast majority of Firefox installations) is beyond me. It’s only available if you do install uBlock Origin, Firefox itself doesn’t protect you from anything. > The point with uBO 1.25 iis that it enables a new browser protection and that this new feature is available only on Firefox, at this time anyway. How many users does Firefox have, and how many users does uBlock Origin have again? Talking about “building arguments around one’s belly”, haha. uBlock Origin does, but uBlock Origin isn’t part of Firefox. The extension may display a prompt to accept a new permission - Access IP address and hostname information - during the update process as it is required for the new The point here is to consider all users besides you two fellows who build their arguments around their own belly, many of those users having a basic anti-virus solution and who rely on a browser-specific protection mainly for blocking ads and tracking.įirefox doesn’t protect you from anything by default. Google Chrome and other Chromium-based browsers don't support this and uBlock Origin cannot look up the requests therefore in those browsers.įirefox users who have uBlock Origin installed should receive the new version of the extension automatically if automatic extension updates is enabled in the browser. Mozilla's Firefox web browser is the only browser with the required DNS API functionality to make these look-ups. The resources may be handled just like any other connection using the extension you may allow some in case they are needed or keep blocking them. ![]() Sites may use CNAME redirects for content delivery purposes. The uncloaked sites are displayed in a smaller font size underneath the canonical names these may be used to determine whether a resource should be blocked or allowed. The resources are highlighted in blue in the uBlock Origin interface when all connections of the active site are displayed. The latest uBlock Origin version for Firefox looks up non-blocked resources to uncover first-party tracking and block these attempts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |