dngray

It is, which is why I'm removing it. You can expect this from CNET, Techradar and bullshit outlets like that.

This is VPN marketing material mouth pieces 101.

Just be mindful decentralization doesn't inherently mean there is privacy.

Seems like a step up from "Covenant Eyes" with weirdo politicians sharing their porn habits with their children.

At this point I have to wonder whether the "Signal is CIA funded" narrative is not just butthurt Russian trolls mad at the fact it's also used by spies and informants for secure communication.

It's probably also media's fault for this. They only publish when a bad person does a bad thing on the internet with it, not all the millions of users who don't do bad things. That would be boring.

Download Navi from F-Droid. It does not have as much web functionality as Vanadium

From the looks of it Navi is just a download manager, not an actual web browser.

For that reason, I use IceCat on computer.

But do you actually compile those binaries yourself. A lot of browsers are open source.

Brave is still Chromium in a new coat of paint and you’re still aiding Google in their domination of web standards.

That is a little unfair tbh, they do quite a lot, such as their privacy shields, including the script blocking one which is basically like NoScript.

They also do some work on anti fingerprinting tech and other things along that vein.

Except we're transparent as to why and Burung Hantu (Marco Wollank) (current owner of PTIO) is not.

Ungoogled Chromium is my current favourite

The reason we don't recommend Ungoogled Chromium and instead recommend Brave on the privacyguides.org website is because they have proper build infrastructure managed by the Brave. With Ungoogled Chromium the binaries are produced by third parties, vary in version etc. People claim they would only use "open source software" but they do download binary versions nevertheless and don't compile that code themselves. This increases the risk of a supply chain attack, where a malicious binary is submitted and nobody has really knows until it is too late. The other issue is they disable CRLSets because of "google hate" which we think actually increases the likelihood of a MiTM attack occurring because rogue certificates are not detected and invalidated as quickly as they could have been.

This article describes a few other things https://qua3k.github.io/ungoogled/

ungoogled chromium exists

The reason is they have proper build infrastructure managed by the Brave. With Ungoogled Chromium the binaries are produced by third parties, vary in version etc. People claim they would only use "open source software" but they do download binary versions nevertheless and don't compile that code themselves. This increases the risk of a supply chain attack, where a malicious binary is submitted and nobody has really knows until it is too late. The other issue is they disable CRLSets because of "google hate" which we think actually increases the likelihood of a MiTM attack occurring because rogue certificates are not detected and invalidated as quickly as they could have been.

This article describes a few other things https://qua3k.github.io/ungoogled/

Not unless websites require certain features to be visible, that's the major concern.

I always understood it as they don't parse the actual details of emails (the body) to generate an add profile. It doesn't mean they don't track what websites you're visiting whilst logged in though.

My guess to this is that it's not accurate, for example email chains, or someone mentioning something that you have no intention of buying. As the email body is very unstructured it would be quite difficult to interpret whether those keywords should be added as an interest, having said that, with advanced AI that can parse context of a sentence they may just start doing that again if they can with accuracy.