Wait, they're still asking for affiliate codes from their server? I thought they stopped injecting those when they were caught.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Brave Search Now Available in Beta as Privacy-Protecting Search Engine Alternative to Google
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fingerprinting is actually one place (and an important place at that) where Safari shines. iPhones are common, as therefore is Safari on one. If you read their support documents, it sends a generalised fingerprint. This is unlike almost any other browser. tor does it but only if you don’t add anything or do anything with the browser other than the recommended defaults. Safari plus private rely is an excellent option. It’s not open source, so you can’t rely on it for illegal antics, nor cases where anonymity is paramount, but then nor is an iPhone at all. But for what it is it’s excellent as a general purpose private browser on a mainstream platform. And it’s default. It’s a boon for the privacy conscious actually.
I obviously haven't looked at the stuff myself, but based on this I'd say they're downloading cookies that will identify the browser as if the user clicked on an affiliate link and then reap the benefits from there.
So technically they've stopped ****ing around with replacing the URL with an affiliate link, but it's only a technicality. If you or I click or follow an affiliate link, then the link itself is not the relevant part, it's the cookie that gets placed as a result of clicking or following that link and the cookie will tell the website who to credit for my visit/purchase. Which you probably know, but I'm just describing in case someone who reads this doesn't know.
They seem to have just skipped the URL part, and just straight up download the cookies at first launch.
It's stuff like this and the constant "oops we didn't meant to, it was a bug, a very beneficial bug, but a bug, pinky swear cross my heart hope to die" response that makes me not trust them at all.
The CEO of Mozilla openly wants to deplatform people, which goes against their free and open internet policy. Chrome does far worse things than messing with your links. Please don't try to downplay Google or your entire argument is invalid. If Brave is a scam, please provide the evidence, instead of conjecture. I'm not saying I support their behavior, but there aren't really any safe browsers anymore, except perhaps Safari.
See Poseidon's comment for evidence, https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...le.2301880/page-3?post=30038404#post-30038404
Mozilla CEO's statements are in reference to Facebook and other moderated platforms that aren't about free speech and don't claim to be. You expect your browser to just serve whatever content you want and let you install whatever you want, and that's what Firefox does. If that ever changes, I leave.
Brave is even worse than Google. That's not downplaying Google. Just cause Brave isn't a giant corp doesn't mean it can't be less trustworthy than one.
Last edited by a moderator:
That is downplaying Google. The level of intrusiveness goes beyond anything legal. They've been sued for Incognito mode not being Incognito whatsoever, they've been shown to record audio from the Chrome browser itself without any intervention, they censor and modify search results based on what they think you should see ... it was literally an entire project that was announced that they implemented to control the content you search for. Changing some links for profit does not even remotely compare to the things Google has done and is doing and it's only going to get worse. You are downplaying Google in every sense of the word.
Last edited by a moderator:
Let’s say for the sake of argument, I’ll assume everything you said is true. And I’m inclined to do so because I’ve got my gripes with Google as it is, how is any of it relevant?
You’ve introduced some whataboutism with your comment below
And you succeeded in someone engaging with that. But it’s unclear to me how this relates to the topic at hand and the topic of this thread, the Brave browser.
Are you suggesting that Brave’s bad practices are a-okay and beyond reproach because there are other browsers that display bad practices?
How is someone to take your comments, if not an attempt to distract from Brave’s bad and hypocritical practices?
Moreover, does a browser’s marketing an communication have any bearing on your opinion re: a browser’s bad practices?
If one browser acts like they’re more pious than another browser, does their bad practice have more weight in that light for you, or does it not matter to you if they claim that they’re so much more respectful of you and your privacy?
Edit: Typos
Last edited:
I've been using the Brave browser for years, but I'm now in the search of a good substitute, because I don't like their policy. They pretend to be "privacy-focused" but they have ads, rewards, and related trash. The thing is that the browser is great and filters ads beautifully, but their business model is far from "privacy-focused".
Incognito mode does exactly what it says and what every other similar feature in other browsers does. Google tracks you a lot outside of Chrome, but you can only compare Brave to Chrome because Brave's parent company doesn't own anything else similar to what Google owns. You wanna see how Brave does their search engine differently, guess you'll have a chance to find out soon. Wouldn't surprise me if it mined cryptocurrency on non-Brave browsers.
Anyway, this isn't about Google. All I mentioned was that even Chrome doesn't mess with your web content. They're both pretty awful browsers either way if you care about privacy.
Last edited:
I'm all for privacy, but anything that Brendan Eich is involved with is something I will not be, on principle alone!
If someone wants a similar experience to Brave, I thoroughly recommend the new Firefox 89. With extensions, you have the most private browser out there. If you "need" Chromium, get a de-googled Chromium build for those sites where the devs were too lazy to code for other browser support like Gecko or WebKit. Firefox is a great Safari alternative.
If someone wants a similar experience to Brave, I thoroughly recommend the new Firefox 89. With extensions, you have the most private browser out there. If you "need" Chromium, get a de-googled Chromium build for those sites where the devs were too lazy to code for other browser support like Gecko or WebKit. Firefox is a great Safari alternative.
Yeah, if they're still requesting referral codes, that's a red flag for messing with cookies. I suppose that's testable too. At this point trusting Brave not to mess with your browsing is like trusting DoorDash not to steal tips. "They promised not to do it again!"
They do mess with your web content. They censor search results and control the information they want you to see.
I wasn't trying to introduce whataboutism, I was just pointing out the error in suggesting that equally bad browsers are okay. None of these practices are okay. For security Firefox is not great out of the box, but it can be tweaked ifinitely for privacy. And Safari is very good as well. I use a mix of Firefox with DuckDuckGo and then I use iCloud to sync my Firefox bookmarks to iOS Safari (I'm on Windows) because I like blocking ads with AdGuard because no other browser has that extensive level of ad blocking in iOS.
For security/privacy, I would probably rank them as Safari > Firefox > Edge > Brave > Chrome
I cannot possibly fathom how anyone can mix security and privacy in the same breath as anything Google related.
DDG is one of the worst engines going. And your speculating that they won’t keep your searches private in the future, nice scare tactic..
Brave, the browser which has gained momentum and popularity in recent years, is taking another leap forward in its quest to offer users a more private and secure internet experience. Starting today, Brave browser users will have access to Brave Search in beta, a completely new search engine that offers "unmatched privacy."
Brave Search was announced last March, and since its announcement, it's been tested by more than 100,000 users. Brave, which prides itself on being a "browser reimagined," recently surpassed 32 million monthly active users and is hoping that Brave Search will further its role in the browser market.
Brave Search beta is available to all Brave browser users on iOS, Android, and desktop starting today. At first, users will need to manually select Brave Search as their search engine option, alongside other choices such as Google and Bing. However, Brave Search will become the default and standard search engine for the Brave browser later this year.
Unlike Google and others, Brave Search doesn't track users, their searches, or clicks. Instead, Brave Search "puts users first, and fully in control of their online experience." The "completely independent" search engine also promises full transparency, with "no secret methods or algorithms for bias results," and soon will roll out "community-curated open ranking models to ensure diversity and prevent algorithmic biases" and censorship.
Brendan Eich, CEO and co-founder of Brave, says the new search engine is the "real alternative" to Big Tech, such as Google, and that it offers a new way for users to securely and privately browse the web without the worry of their privacy.One major upside for users using Brave Search, currently still in beta, is its ad-free experience. When the search engine exits beta, Brave is pledging to offer users options for an ad-free search experience and an "ad-supported free" experience later. The company also said it would "explore bringing private ads with BAT revenue share to search," as it's done for Brave Browser users.
Brave relies on its own index for the web, rather than relying on Google Search and Microsoft's Bing. To do this, Brave is relying on "anonymized contributions from the community to improve and refine results."At launch, Brave's index will still struggle to meet the levels of Google and others with search queries such as image search. Until Brave's index can expand, it will rely on using third-party APIs. Brave Search is also introducing an "independence metric" that will inform users on the independence of their search results to ensure no bias in the index or algorithm. Brave Search in beta is available starting today for Brave browsers on iOS, Android, and the desktop. It will also be available to non-Brave browser users at search.brave.com
Article Link: Brave Search Now Available in Beta as Privacy-Protecting Search Engine Alternative to Google
I wonder how Brave search will differ than say Duckduckgo?
I don't know if others have notice but Duckduckgo search seems to be similar to Bing search. Where www.startpage.com seems to be more similar to Google search. In displaying of websites and images being displayed.
Well I have seen websites and images show up in Duckduckgo search but not Google search but than other websites and images show up in Google search but not Duckduckgo search.
Well Duckduckgo is okay for most searches it is not the best.
I wonder if Brave search will show different searches than Duckduckgo and Google? Or be more similar to Google search or Duckduckgo if it not some thing new and different?
Out side of the privacy issue Google search was much better 10 years ago.
So I wonder if Brave search will be more similar to Duckduckgo or Google in what websites and images show up or some thing different.
Problem is most search engines don’t crawl most of the web. Google model now on search is less on database kay words search and more on what the company seems to think you should see.
Well many message boards and chat rooms and sites I have been on Google search no longer shows it but Duckduckgo shows more of it.
But than showing reddit and Quora posts I find Google shows more of that than say Duckduckgo.
Outside of the privacy issues I find I need to use 3 or 4 search engines to find stuff.
Lots of times Google and DuckDuckGo don’t show it. But I do find it really interesting that DuckDuckGo will show hundreds of things that Google will not show and Google will show hundreds of things DuckDuckGo will not show.
Well out side of the privacy issues I find like it is like the 90s where people back than use to use 3 to 4 search engines.
It can be frustrating to use DuckDuckGo, Bing and Google and still not find what you looking for but www.startpage.com or yahoo search may show it.
After spending time using different search engined they all show really small part of the internet.
What a massive missed opportunity to compete with Startpage and use Google's search results with similar privacy to DuckDuckGo. Even using Bing's search results would've been better. It'll take years for Brave Search to ever have good search results. That's why Bing struggled for so long, even after its release in 2009.
Brave, the browser which has gained momentum and popularity in recent years, is taking another leap forward in its quest to offer users a more private and secure internet experience. Starting today, Brave browser users will have access to Brave Search in beta, a completely new search engine that offers "unmatched privacy."
Brave Search was announced last March, and since its announcement, it's been tested by more than 100,000 users. Brave, which prides itself on being a "browser reimagined," recently surpassed 32 million monthly active users and is hoping that Brave Search will further its role in the browser market.
Brave Search beta is available to all Brave browser users on iOS, Android, and desktop starting today. At first, users will need to manually select Brave Search as their search engine option, alongside other choices such as Google and Bing. However, Brave Search will become the default and standard search engine for the Brave browser later this year.
Unlike Google and others, Brave Search doesn't track users, their searches, or clicks. Instead, Brave Search "puts users first, and fully in control of their online experience." The "completely independent" search engine also promises full transparency, with "no secret methods or algorithms for bias results," and soon will roll out "community-curated open ranking models to ensure diversity and prevent algorithmic biases" and censorship.
Brendan Eich, CEO and co-founder of Brave, says the new search engine is the "real alternative" to Big Tech, such as Google, and that it offers a new way for users to securely and privately browse the web without the worry of their privacy.One major upside for users using Brave Search, currently still in beta, is its ad-free experience. When the search engine exits beta, Brave is pledging to offer users options for an ad-free search experience and an "ad-supported free" experience later. The company also said it would "explore bringing private ads with BAT revenue share to search," as it's done for Brave Browser users.
Brave relies on its own index for the web, rather than relying on Google Search and Microsoft's Bing. To do this, Brave is relying on "anonymized contributions from the community to improve and refine results."At launch, Brave's index will still struggle to meet the levels of Google and others with search queries such as image search. Until Brave's index can expand, it will rely on using third-party APIs. Brave Search is also introducing an "independence metric" that will inform users on the independence of their search results to ensure no bias in the index or algorithm. Brave Search in beta is available starting today for Brave browsers on iOS, Android, and the desktop. It will also be available to non-Brave browser users at search.brave.com
Article Link: Brave Search Now Available in Beta as Privacy-Protecting Search Engine Alternative to Google
If Apple ever releases a search engine, I hope they use Startpage's flawless business model.
Brave is literally OEM, re-skinned Chrome.
If you don’t trust Chrome, you shouldn’t trust Brave for the exact same reasons.
Brave, chromium , Opera, Vivaldi, Microsoft Edge uses Chrome base engine.
Where Google Chrome just takes the Chrome base engine with more Google stuff on top of the Chrome engine called Google Chrome.
So unless you die hard open source than you do not know what is in the code.
But Chrome base browsers do seem faster and more snappy, but one of the problems is most of the web now is coded for Google than Firefox.
And Firefox is getting more bloated, less features and the model is different than model back in the old days when FireFox started. The FireFox today is not the FireFox in the old days.
What Safari problem on the iPad or Safari problem on a desktop?
Because I don’t have any of this problem on old laptop running Windows 10 using Firefox.