I am a little disappointed that Vivaldi did not do so well in this test. What do you think? Is there a way to improve Vivaldi in these areas? Is it necessary? Should privacy-conscious people use another browser?
I am a little disappointed that Vivaldi did not do so well in this test. What do you think? Is there a way to improve Vivaldi in these areas? Is it necessary? Should privacy-conscious people use another browser?
The person doing these tests works for Brave and doesn’t disclose this on the main page. He keeps spamming social media with his results and therefore this comes up time and time again. The main problem is that he refuses to test browsers which have been configured, he always tests them ootb. For Vivaldi this means ad and tracking protection is disabled, even though the choice of setting this up is presented to the user in the very first setup steps (one‐click operation), without the need to visit settings …
I wouldn’t take the results serious. If you want a sliver/the chance of privacy, you have to use Tor browser anyway.
Of course this is bullshit. One single Browser does not win in basically every category except this is an advertisement for said browser.
@Dirk @accentgrave, many are confused about what is important to privacy. These are not technical details or statistics (OS, screen resolution, language, etc.) that are important for the proper functioning of a web page, but personal data
It is always a compromise, if I activate all the protections it has, many pages stop working correctly. Privacy depends more on the search engines used and the user’s common sense than on the browser(if other than Chrome/EDGE/Opera)
I use cookie whitelist AND a Javascript whitelist. I’m used to not “properly working” websites.
@Dirk, I’m too, good for pages which you know you can whitelist.
Yep. I have a “set” of sites I allow cookies and JS for because I use those sites on a regular basis. Everything else can screw off.
If I really need the information on a site an I am quite sure I cannot get this information on another site I open it in a private mode window where JS is allowed and cookies are destroyed after closing the window. Otherwise Ctrl+W it is …
@Dirk, a good extension I use and which is a good complement for your ad and trackerblocker. It’s called Site Bleacher it’s remove by default all the crap from the pages you visit (cookies, local storages, IndexedDBs, service workers, cache storages, filesystems and webSQLs…), except from the whitelisted sites, all other you “had never visited”.
https://github.com/wooque/site-bleacher
Don’t forget to whitelist the sites where you want to log in.
Kinda suspected something like this with Brave being so highly rated. Pretty sure if you add the usual privacy addons to Firefox you’ll end up with more or less the same results.
Even if this is independent, Brave turns off a lot of the kinds of trackers and scripts that make big corporate social media websites work properly. That’s why a lot fo those websites load slower on Brave than on something like Vivaldi.
Important context, original test was created before they were invited to work at Brave and in part because of their creation of the test. And LibreWolf and Mullvad wins the tests, not Brave.
And testing out-of-the-box experience is valid use case as that is what most of the non-tech people you recommend the browser will run.
Also while it’s great that Vivaldi has ad and tracker protection added, it’s average at best. Installing uBlock Origin with default configuration is better than what Vivaldi offers.
Here is the source for that.
You down vote for providing a source!?
Right…
The point is his allegiance should be disclosed front and center on the main page. Might as well declare it as Brave browser advertisement. You can’t be impartial, if you work for the company.
https://privacytests.org/about.html