Been a while. But since I have my security and privacy mostly under control there was no need to be online in the privacy comunity 
But a question arose:
What custom filter lists can I use for brave browser?
For example from this page, what would I import:
?
ublock or vivaldi list?
Thank for your reply.
How did you know which ones to pick from github, I mean there are many versions for the same list?
Oh, sorry, I forgot to link Yokoffing’s guide. You can check it out to find more filter lists.
It worked. It has to be the “raw” version of the filter list.
Shameless plug:
this is my own project
PrivacyGuides explicitly states that you shouldn’t add any filter lists to Brave lest you stand out from the other Brave users:
Brave allows you to select additional content filters within the internal
brave://adblockpage. We advise against using this feature; instead, keep the default filter lists. Using extra lists will make you stand out from other Brave users and may also increase attack surface if there is an exploit in Brave and a malicious rule is added to one of the lists you use.
But if you don’t mind, go ahead, just be aware of that. Still, in my opinion, if you’re on Desktop and want to proceed, you should just use uBlock Origin on Firefox. On Android, there’s Mull as an option, but it has issues.
I am aware of the fingeprinting part.
Guess I’m kinda bored lol, since I’m on GrapheneOS and could just use Vanadium (which I did for a long time)
Well there was a site who’s malicous popups I was trying to block:
Dandelion Sprout’s Annoyances List took care of that.
Well at least for 2 days now lol
This is a privacy vs anonymity issue in my book. There is no way you get anonymity with a browser other than Tor, maybe Mullvad. Given this I personally do not think there is harm in adding lists of trusted authors that in fact reduce the amount of trackers loaded and thus actually improve privacy.
@yes I wrote with Dandelion, he suggest not to use url shortener do to:
Oh, I didn’t know that… anyways removed the list from Brave.
It probably is due to certain syntax options that are not working with brave. F.x. the whitelisting of certain rules like Exceptions on @@ not effective in brave · Issue #383 · brave/adblock-rust · GitHub
Please could you clarify why you mentioned anonymity here, since I was speaking about one standing out, i.e. become more fingerprintable, when you add a custom filter list to Brave’s adblocker? Also, apologizes for the late response, I was very busy.
In regards to it “improving privacy,” yes, I partially agree with that—it removes some trackers. However, it makes you distinct from other Brave users and thus decreases privacy; essentially, fingerprinters can distinguish you from other Brave users more easily.
Additionally, I’m unsure in how Brave’s lack of anonymity can adequately justify adding filter lists, which has a risk. (For this example, let’s say it doesn’t make you stand out from other Brave users.)
Now, you may disagree and repeat, “That’s why it’s important for them to be trusted maintainers.” I mostly agree with this as well, but remember that there is a risk of supply chain attacks. Quoting from PrivacyGuides:
A contributor or employee might first work their way into a position of power within a project or organization, and then abuse that position by adding malicious code.
A developer may be coerced by an outside party to add malicious code.
The above mainly applies to application security, but it can also be applied to filter lists. Why? It’s due to the fact the issues above can happen to any filter list, if you contemplate it. To mitigate this, though not completely, one has to be careful with what they add. As a result, this is another issue of enabling another filter list on Brave, or adding a custom filter list.
Not really sure i understand your question correctly. But simply put brave is not supee fingerprint resistant. Definitely not on the level that mullvad browser is. So when this is a concern use that. Else if you use brave and just want some more privacy I personally do see no realistic harm in adding another blocklist.
I mentioned anonymity because i think that that is the only reason you want to have fingerprint measures. Theoretically you could fingerprint people based on the lists in an adblocker, but it is much more likely you wll be fingerprintable in other ways before that comes into play.
Then on supply chain risk. Filters have not a whole lot of control over the brower. It is basically a config file but it cannot change the functionality of the adblocker unless that would have some kind of zero day, which I think is an unlikely scenario, as their are bigger attack factors.
Extremely late response, but Thanks for responding. However I’m not entirely agreeing on what you’re saying. For example:
I completely agree that Brave is not super fingerprinting-resistent. Still, I don’t see that as a reason to reduce fingerprinting mitigations.
No, because if one has no fingerprinting protection, it is reduced privacy.
Right! Of course, but it’s still a factor.
It’s fine that we have differing options, and I respect what you’re saying. In my opinion, however, it doesn’t weigh out the consequences that follow.
Well guys here is a update. The list I endet up with was this:
So far so good
I’ve had a very good experience with Hagezi Pro++ at the DNS level. It was the right balance for in terms of aggressiveness/permissiveness.
Same here.
No, or very few, issues using it as filter list in Brave.
I dropped the rest.
