Brave's Bad Script Default Setting & Privacy Risk


I am a recent Brave user with some recommended suggestions for increased privacy.

First, please know that I am an avid privacy advocate who’s disgusted by how much consumer’s privacy is violated whether online, or on smartphones. That said, I’ve been a long-standing user of DuckDuckGo’s web browser which is one of very few browsers that attempts to aid users with privacy browsing.

Unfortunately, Mozilla Firefox has been bought by Google which makes it somewhat redundant, notwithstanding I’ve noticed that your browser also has affiliation with Google Chrome, especially since Google is one of the biggest privacy violation offenders.

Nevertheless, one of the things I admired about Firefox were the Add-Ons users could download to help facilitate privacy such as; No Scripts, Ghostery, Historia and the likes. Sadly, many of the sites that I frequent have learned that I use these and other privacy Add-Ons and have written codes on their websites to disable them, particularly No Script and Ghostery making them useless leaving the user wide open for snooping which I’m not happy about.

Clearly, No Scripts is one of the best privacy Add-Ons besides Ghostery because it gives the user complete autonomy for “all” websites across the internet, precluding them and their advertisers from using scripts to follow users around the net.

Being able to choose which individual scripts run on a site is the most effective way to hinder would-be prying eyes which Brave lacks. Although you have (according to your mission statement) written efforts to ensure user privacy, I found it odd that you lacked this basic and fundamental function on your browser by your allowing an “all or nothing” Scripts feature.

Not only do you have this dangerous feature enabling “all” scripts on a visiting webpage, you also don’t have a way to aid the user to preclude the aforementioned lurkers. This is surprisingly horrible to realize.

This brings me to my recommendation for improved privacy. Please, I beg you to implement a drop-down menu on the browser that would allow or disable individual scripts when visiting website. This is imperative because I’ve learned that the visiting website is not the only snooper on their respective site. At a minimum, 6 or more snoopers lurk in the shadows which may have nothing to do with the site, and by your default setting of "all or nothing"scripts, you are inadvertently putting the user at risks for being tracked which makes your browser counter-intuative.

For example, I’ve visited a site using the browser and noticed there were 14 Scripts lurkers on the site were being blocked before enabling Scripts. However, once I “ enabled” scripts, the browser went from blocking 14 to only 3. So you can see the importance of an " autonomous script" feature.

If you can’t accomplish this, may I suggest that you mirror Firefox and implement Add-On features the user can download to the browser to further assist with privacy settings?

I have several other recommendations about your browser, but I’d like to start here with the most pressing.

Thank you for your assistance.

Brave is based on Chromium, not Chrome.

Hi Calder?

Okay, thank you for the correction and oversight of the Chrome issue, but I was struck by your response, or lack thereof.

I wrote a very comprehensive privacy problem with recommendations to improve user experience, and your response was to correct me about the Google Chrome. No introduction, salutation or indication acknowledging my concerns with an action plan to at least look into it with a resolution, which speaks to customer service.

So, I have to ask myself the point of soliciting feedback if the response appears to come off as curt is the result?

There are, as previously mentioned a few other suggestions and recommendations I’d like to make, but I’m beginning to think that my efforts would be futile.



I’m a citizen … i am in no way affiliated with the Brave Dev team, or other Brave staff. (moniker icon and profile will confirm).

And to be clear, I wasn’t nitpicking, just clarifying an erroneous assumption (other innocent folks lurking this forum may take your “Chrome” statement at heart : )