Brave update improves script blocking and Google sign-in privacy

1 Like

Still useless as ever for me when it comes to the most basic fingerprinting tests:

The only thing it spoofs it battery pct. Still leaks user accounts.

For comparison Vivaldi:

And now for a truly private browser like hardened Mull:

With the proper add ons Mull can spoof everything from user agent to screen res and time zone and doesn’t even report battery pct.

In short, I still don’t see a good reason to use Brave on mobile.

Edit: checked the app store version and it’s still 1.50.xx I’ll try again when 1.51 is released for mobile.

Specifically on Android, Firefox or other Gecko-based browsers don’t yet support Per-Site Process Isolation which makes them inherently less secure than chromium-based browsers. So, that’s one very good reason.


Fingerprinting test sites are useless and are unreliable.


This isn’t correct, it does, but not by default, and not on the stable Firefox. You’ll need access to about:config to enable fusion from there which means Mull or FF nightly or beta.

FF on Android does have some issues, like no support for 120hz or anything higher than 60hz for that matter, and maybe being a tad slower, and some websites behaving weirdly since most web devs optimize for chromium, but they don’t have to do with privacy and security.

This is just a sad reply. The website was literally able to tell everything about my device save for battery pct, and brave leaked user accounts. Exactly how is that useless?? All of it is correct, none of it is made up. If they’re unreliable and Brave still couldn’t protect my fingerprint from them they makes it worse, not better.

No disrespect whatsoever meant, but loyalty to a service or software is very unintelligent. Software is only good and worth defending so long as it does what you want it to do. You do not owe devs anything.

1 Like

The fact that it isn’t enabled by default should be the most important thing here. How many people do you think will actually go to about:config to change any settings? I bet most people don’t even know such a thing exists. And it seems that there is also a good reason why it hasn’t been enabled by default since my earlier link showed that “it results in a severely degraded / broken experience.” So, not something that you should be recommending people to do at the moment.

1 Like

Oh I don’t think FF based browsers are for everyone, but if you care about privacy then you should expect to have to do some work. It’s not difficult to enable it if you have the right browser, and the reason why places like this forum exist is to help people with these things anyways. If privacy was super straightforward and required no work (which tbh should be the ideal scenario) we wouldn’t need techlore or similar forums and YT channels.

Regarding the broken experience, I’ve been using FF based browsers for a while with this enabled manually and I’m still waiting on my first site to break. It doesn’t seem to be true at all in my experience after thousands of pages and websites.

That said I certainly do agree with you that it’s very strange, even a bit stupid, that FF doesn’t have this enabled by default. It’s also pretty stupid to disable access to about config in stable FF, which is what most people install. FF devs make stupid and weird decisions all the time.

Thanks for sharing

I did not notice a difference between Brave 1.50 and 1.51, but this is the first time that I used that site to analyze.

Is there a better website for a privacy check?

Try it will give you the same fingerprint hash every time even if you clear the cookies in brave.

1 Like