The option to turn ON / OFF Automatic Updates. Please

Brave Feature Requests Desktop Requests
1

I really like Brave. It’s faster than the other browsers and for someone who doesn’t have top speed internet it’s very useful to have a browser like Brave.

And I like what you’re doing for privacy and how you want to change internet advertising and all the rest.

But this morning there was an automatic update and it caught me by surprise and I didn’t like it.

I may have clicked on the green Update Brave arrow believing it would lead me to a page where I would see what the update is and then I would decide what to do – but instead it began the process of updating,

OR the update was just done automatically and the green arrow was just there to tell me to restart Brave.

It’s not clear what happened and it bothers me.

But what I know for sure is that I did not explicitely gave the permission to Brave to do the update because I was not given the option to accept it now or do it later.

I thought updates would work like in Firefox where I have the choice to manually update when I want to. (“Check for updates but let you choose to install them”)

One of the reasons I turn off all autoupdates for all the stuff installed on my computer is I don’t have a reliable internet connection.

Sometimes for some reason I lose my connection temporarily for a few minutes and if I was downloading something I have to restart again. It happens.

So whenever I want to update a program I do it manually and carefully – and I also try to do a small backup first, just in case.

Because sometimes problems happen. And it’s nobody’s fault.

I understand that you want users to use the latest update for security reasons.

But as long as the user is clearly notified there’s a update and they should update their browser there’s no reason to force the update process automatically without asking for permission first.

It can wait a couple of hours or even a couple of days.

Can you PLEASE add a disable automatic update option in the Settings?

Autoupdates could be the default option but not having the option to turn it off bothers me.

The user should have the option to let Brave update automatically OR to be notified there’s an update and having the choice to update manually when the user decides to.

I don’t want to try to enable this option indirectly by telling Windows to block the update and ask for my permission first, or to block it using the firewall. I don’t want to do that.

Just like in Firefox there’s the “Check for updates but let you choose to install them” option, there should be a simple option like that in the Brave settings menu:

Turn off Automatic updates + install updates manually.

I’m sure the majority of Brave users will let the default autoupdate option ON and that’s fine but it should still be an option we can turn OFF in the Setttings for whatever reason.

Meanwhile, if there’s a way to turn it off outside of the Settings menu I’d like to know how.

I’m familiar with the configuration tweaks with “About:Config” in Firefox but I’m not sure if there’s something similar in Brave.

Thank you.

2 Likes
2

We have an issue tracking this feature request:

3 Likes
3

If this is true, then it’s a deal breaker for me, I won’t install any software that auto updates without a way to stop it. If Brave does this without notifying the user, then I consider it malware, just as bad as any other sneaky developer that thinks they have ownership of my PC. I tried Brave a few years ago, liked it, but won’t be coming back after seeing this today. The most basic of software etiquette has been ignored by Brave developers.

7 Likes
4

Devs should add this feature in Brave, but meanwhile you can try an alternative way. Since Brave is based on Chromium source code, you can disable updates in similar way:

  1. Open services.msc via Run (Win+R)
  2. Select Brave Update service and change Startup type to Disabled

image
image1188×520 157 KB

5

Since the Brave update service (bravem) was already disabled I used this:

  1. Open ‘services.msc ‘ with Admin rights
  2. Select service as ‘mikchester’ suggests and change to manual
1 Like
6

I can only assume auto-updates are mandatory are because some troon has plans for us. It’s that simple. Look at this node.js BS. Every time someone asks about it - “but why?” they ask. But because I don’t trust you, that’s why!
Auto updating at the whims of whatever tranny / faggot fetishist wants to push a commit?

NO - much bigger security risk than any of these browser vulnerabilities for the last decade. Buncha dweebs theoretically fixing this and that theoretical problem and well bad updates that wipe your hard drive? NO REFUNDS.

2 Likes
7

Delete your account, @braav_user.

2 Likes
8

No, that thread is LOCKED. You’re linking to a completely shut down, locked thread. What are we to do w/ that?.. It also says in 2019 a “flag” would be implemented I don’t see it. Where is it? So, this thread does absolutely nothing but prove that for 4 years they’ve been inactive on this… Where’s the flag?

11

@fmarier I’m wanting to say there was a different reply somewhere that said this was aborted because of security purposes. But wanted to check with you to see if you know anything more on it.

It is interesting that there had been talk in the Github about adding a flag to disable. Not sure if had been added and then removed or if never done? And if it’s on the radar or not? Tagging you on it since you had replied on it a couple years ago. Not sure if more should be you, Mattches, Rebron, Clifton, or someone else to figure out current thoughts on making this a thing for people?

12

I don’t believe this is something we are working on at the moment (prioritizing is hard when working on a large project like a web browser), but as far as I know it’s not something we’ve decided against doing.

2 Likes
13

It would be great if they added this feature to activate and deactivate updates automatically. For my part, I would like them to add it like the one with the Mozilla Firefox feature. I prefer to update it manually and prevent it from updating automatically. I hope the developers add this new function.

14

Out of curiosity, why? In the majority of situations I can only see benefits to the automatic update on having features, keeping things secure, etc.

15

It’s fine but I’m not telling you the opposite but I would like to have manual updates like what Firefox has but obviously have the updates to the latest version and avoid errors and have new features each user will like the off or on

1 Like
16

I’ve commented about auto-updating in the past; it bears repeating.

Top-of-the-list: some users face both data limits and connection speed caps. For some, this is chronic; for others, these limits are linked to location. Users choosing where to update are also choosing when. As to ‘security’, yes, that’s a valid and important concern, but being an early adopter has its own risks. Me? Specific to updating software, I’ve never found there’s any benefit to being at the front of the line though I try not to lag too far to the rear.

The OP of this thread - in January 2021 - failed to provide any of the requested trouble-shooting information. Top of that list: the operating system being used. In the past, I’ve provided guidance to be used with extreme caution with Windows installations. Here’s one link from Aug 2022:

Whenever I suggest that Windows users check out Microsoft’s Sysinternals, that suggestion is always accompanied by a caution: use this tool improperly and you’ll brick your computer. Guaranteed.

Also worth noting: since posting my Aug 2022 comment, I’ve modified my computers to dual-boot either an old Windows version (for off-line archival purposes) or - for current use - Linux. Brave - installed in the Linux instance - doesn’t automatically update; or - put more accurately - I’ve toggled the appropriate switches to prevent any application from automatically updating. This option - available in Linux - is absent in Windows. I’m ignorant of Apple’s operating systems.

1 Like
17

Personally, I would keep the auto-update on anyway, but for a number of reasons (of which the most important have been well explained by @redbike9) I believe this flag should be kind of mandatory… Honestly, I thought updates were easily “pausable”, but I’m kind of surprised they are not.

I also understand what the team says about priority and stuff… but honestly this is kind of high priority IMO (and I won’t even use it…).

18

“why would anyone ever do something other than the way that I think is the best”? Your reasoning that you can “only see benefits to the automatic updates” is ironic to me, because that frame of thinking is exactly the reason why auto updates should be optional. What you think is the best for you is not necessarily best for others. It is ethically questionable to not offer users a choice, period.

And let’s be frank, software QA is at all time low these days, so no, I don’t trust devs to push out the best possible updates every time. Just look at the shitshow Apple is today, yet they keep rolling out new buggy bloated updates that will break your system.

19

I have no issues on my iPhone. In fact, it’s been working better than Android ever had.

Well, let’s put it this way. Having an outdated, unsecure program that is unable to access some of the primary features…that’s best for whom?

And when people get viruses or issues because of it, 9 times out of 10 they blame the program developer. “How come you didn’t auto update?” “Why didn’t you annoy me more to make me understand?” It becomes a bunch of things.

People have a choice. Use what’s given or go elsewhere. There’s an ethical and moral standard to do the best one can to keep devices secure and features working. This is what the majority of people want and is what businesses are held to.

Which I think is what leads us to this last part. Keep in mind as you speak about ethics and all, you’re saying that people should have a choice to play Russian Roulette. Places like Brave aren’t handing you the gun and bullet to go shoot yourself. They point to safe options and alternatives. It doesn’t mean you can’t find a way to get the bullet, but they aren’t going to be the ones to blame for it. It requires your effort.

NOTE

Do keep in mind I’m still advocating for them to add this feature. I’m big on giving people choices and everything. But what I’m getting at in many places is the lack of logic from some. Instead of the ranting of claims like saying it’s about ethics or whatever, it’s just the simple:

“I just like to be in control. It bothers me having a program that makes a decision for me. I’d most likely update, but just want to do it in my own time and when I feel most comfortable.”

I mean, anything like that. It’s just about people being honest with themselves and others. Just have to say you have a request that might not make sense or have a “good reason,” but it’s just a preference. That’s a good answer too.

20

Maybe add a warning this software forces auto-update on users? It doesn’t feel right, maybe that could help?

21

Totally agree with everything you said. I find it ironic that something that claims that they are on your side when it comes to privacy forces you to do something against your wishes. That’s a red flag to me. That’s why I dumped Windows for Linux. They can’t force you to update in Linux. Just turn off updates for any software you wish until you want to update and you can go back to a previous version if you don’t like the update. I’ll never use Windows again !

1 Like
22

Something ‘against your wishes’ is NOT automatic updates, Automatic updates are necessary for security reasons, also as a support, if people use 10 old versions of Brave, how can Support work efficiently?
There is people in this forum who are not willing to upgrade to win10 for being stubborn, and they keep nagging about the whole ‘support’ for Win7 and Vista, so everytime they bring an issue, it is probably their inability to update the Browser which causes most issues.

Also, I am sorry to say it like this, but having 3 brain of cells will make you stop ‘automatic updates’.
You know how? Firewalls, I use a Firewall called Fort Firewall, it can block even svchost services, I don’t need to allow Windows to update ‘against my wishes’ I allow or disallow whenever I want, even default Windows Firewall can do it, but you can only block all svchost or allow it all, you can’t selectively allow services inside it.

So only because you an others lack the capability to understand things and how computers work, doesn’t mean Brave or anyone wants to do whatever you want.

Talking about Brave browser, first… most people install with Admin rights, which is a mistake, why? because unless you are sharing your computer with other Brave users and other user accounts, there is no reason to install Brave with admin rights on Windows.
If you give admin rights, that means the browser will install 3 services which is typical of Omaha updater, which is the same technology Chrome uses for their updater but open source, it is useful because that way Brave can make use of Group policies, which are important for business to restrict things like they can do in Edge and Chrome.

And also Brave will install two task schedulers.

People can easily disable those services and task schedulers easily.

If people don’t give admin rights, Brave will be installer ‘per-user’, in that case, Brave updater will be a startup process, and then the two task schedulers by per user. That means, the 3 can still be disabled.

And like I said, the use of Firewall makes it even easier, you just disable task schedulers and services to make sure the updater never checks updates, but you use the firewall to stop even going to ‘about’ page and then make the browser update.

So… what is wrong with this? if people feel they are such an advanced users, they can easily turn the auto updater off.

Also, I don’t understand your complaints… didn’t you just say that Linux don’t force you to update? that means you shouldn’t worry about Brave, since it will not update automatically? or are you telling me that it works just like Windows, where programs can set their own update mechanism and force users to update?.. therefore there is not an advantage, just complaints while honestly, switching to a limited OS because it doesn’t support a lot of software depending what you do, like Music industry, gaming industry, photography, video editing… if you work professionally, it is either Windows or Mac, but I guess you don’t do anything like that so you are fine with Linux.
And no, there is nothing worst than Linux users saying “but it runs on linux on wine” or whatever, like if running means that it is running as expected or good enough and without any issues.

Again, Firewall and brains are mostly what people need to stop ‘automatic updates’ without internet = no automatic updates, so I don’t get how hard is to understand that for anyone, and why people who are not techy enough, want to play the whole “I don’t want automatic updates” but can’t do a simple firewall rule through terminal.

I mean, people could easily run the zipped version of Brave (in Windows), that doesn’t include the updater = no updates at all. you decide when you un-compress the next Zip file, then use terminal to --user-data-dir= standalone brave and if you want it unsecured but portable for windows you can use --disable-encryption-win and --disable-machine-id so nothing gets encrypted and can be used on any windows computer making it a true portable version (supposedly… I won’t test it, I know `–disable-encryption-win it works though).

So… yeah… I use Nightly which has at least 1 automatic update for 5 days, I still choose when to install my updates whenever I see something useful to test or use from the commits in Github.

So… again, why should Brave officially support something as dumb as turning automatic updates off? unless it is through group policy, not such thing should exist, if people feel like they are advanced users and don’t want automatic updates, then use the already thousand ways to stop automatic updates, just like on Windows, it should work in any other OS, like the Firewall.