I really cannot trust brave, because it doesn’t appear in their best (business) interests to block all data hungry services
We don’t have to dig deep: by default, the toggle to “”“allow Facebook (and Twitter!) embedded posts” is ON ;(
And I believe in the past there were some shenanigans with them not properly filtering out facebook/linked in and whatnot
But at the same time, I’ve heard often it’s for some reason not recommended to mix brave shield and ublock origin. why, and what are the potential downsides?
Quite the contrary. Brave’s business model is exactly why they block data hungry services. Their revenue comes from their own privacy respecting ad network. Besides, they have multiple revenue streams as well.
As for the social media stuff, that’s just a UX compromise. If average users install a browser and every embedded tweet or facebook comment section is a blank white square, they’ll uninstall it thinking the browser is broken. It’s easily toggleable for power users who want strict privacy.
As for mixing brave shields and uBlock Origin, you definitely shouldn’t do that. Both use the exact same filter lists (easyList, etc.). Running both causes race conditions where they fight to block or redirect the same network requests, leading to broken websites, wasted ram, and slower page loads. Just use brave shields, it literally uses the same filters as uBo.
Brave’s built in ad blocker is written in Rust directly into the browser. Shields is completely immune mv3 restrictions. Which, by the way, I know the brave team is still keeping up the reanimated corpse of mv2 for as long as they can, but it’s time to move on as it’s becoming a security risk.
Shields is so efficient that a major gecko browser, (Waterfox) have recently announced that they’re going to be using Braves ad blocking engine.
