ADVERTISEMENT

Mozilla VPN boosted with multi-hop, blocking and custom DNS features

Mozilla introduced new privacy features to its VPN service, Mozilla VPN, earlier this week. The organization launched Mozilla VPN back in June 2020 in select regions and has expanded the availability since then.

Mozilla partnered with Mullvad, a Swedish company, and uses the company's infrastructure for its own Mozilla VPN product.

Mozilla VPN lacked some of the features of Mullvad's own VPN client, such as support for multi-hop connections or the integrated content blocker.

The update that Mozilla released this week introduces support for these features in the VPN client.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mozilla's official blog highlights the three new privacy features.

Multi-Hop

mozilla vpn multi-hop
via https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/mozilla-vpn-adds-advanced-privacy-features-custom-dns-servers-and-multi-hop/

Multi-hop is an interested feature, as it routes the connection through two VPN servers instead of just one. The main idea behind the feature is simple: the user's IP address is protected even if one VPN service is compromised.

User Device > Entry VPN Server > Exit VPN Server

This new powerful privacy feature appeals to those who think twice about their privacy, like political activists, journalists writing sensitive topics, or anyone who’s using a public wi-fi and wants that added peace of mind by doubling-up their VPN servers.

Mozilla VPN users can select the entry and exit VPN servers after choosing Multi-hop under Location; this gives them flexibility when choosing these servers. It is recommended to select servers in different jurisdictions to maximize privacy.

Mullvad notes that using multi-hop may also improve latency or performance, because sometimes, different servers may be used in that case that work better together.

NordVPN, another VPN provider, which supports the feature, does not give its customers options to select the entry and exit server when the feature is selected.

Custom DNS

mozilla vpn custom

Mozilla VPN customers may set custom DNS servers in the client under Network Settings > Advanced DNS Settings.

The options include enabling content blocking DNS servers, to block certain types of unwanted content on the DNS level, or to select a custom DNS server that is used instead.

Three special purpose DNS servers are selectable:

  • Adblock DNS to block advertisement.
  • Anti-tracking DNS to block tracking domains and harmful domains.
  • A combination of adblock and anti-tracking.

The blocking takes place on the DNS level, which is effective as it blocks connection attempts from servers immediately.

Many VPN services support blocking functionality. Private Internet Access has its MACE Content Blocker feature, NordVPN calls its CyberSec.

Closing Words

The new features add value to Mozilla VPN's offering. Both features improve privacy, when enabled.

Most may prefer do subscribe to Mullvad directly, as it offers all the features of the service. Mozilla may reach markets that Mullvad can't, and Firefox users may be more inclined to support Mozilla by subscribing to Mozilla VPN.

Now You: do you use a VPN service?

Summary
Mozilla VPN boosted with multi-hop, blocking and custom DNS features
Article Name
Mozilla VPN boosted with multi-hop, blocking and custom DNS features
Description
Mozilla, maker of Firefox, introduced two new privacy features to its VPN service: multi-hop, to route traffic through two VPN servers, and content blocking functionality.
Author
Publisher
Ghacks Technology News
Logo
Advertisement

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «

Comments

  1. Iron Heart said on September 18, 2021 at 11:16 am
    Reply

    How can Mullvad get features which Mullvad already had? Perhaps Mozilla should put in more effort than cheaply rebranding the service of another company – if they want to evoke any interest, that is.

    1. Ironmectin said on September 18, 2021 at 11:24 pm
      Reply

      How can Brave add a Tor window when they don’t develop Tor
      How can Brave usurp existing adverts by inserting themselves as a man-in-the-middle to become just another ticket-clipper extorting fees
      How can Brave just use other company’s blocklists
      How can Brave put out a fork with minimal patches and not contribute one iota upstream
      How can Brave justify telemetry on their minimal fork

      You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig

      1. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 9:32 am
        Reply

        @Ironmectin

        > How can Brave add a Tor window when they don’t develop Tor

        The Tor feature is meant to hide your IP address as far as Brave is concerned. Nothing more, nothing less. It cannot replace the Tor Browser Bundle since it doesn’t have Tor’s common fingerprint. It can also never have Tor’s fingerprint because of differences between the Blik and Gecko rendering engines. Brave admits this and recommends the Tor Browser Bundle if perfect anonymity is required.

        Also, please use your brain. You are talking about a minor gimmick feature as if it was Brave’s main thing. Brave is a general use browser.

        > How can Brave usurp existing adverts by inserting themselves as a man-in-the-middle to become just another ticket-clipper extorting fees

        Every adblocker filters the ads of a website, website owners do not incur losses from Brave that would be any different from their losses incurred by e.g. uBlock Origin.

        Furthermore, Brave’s locally generated, privacy-respecting ads have nothing to do with the ads displayed on websites. They have their own partners which pay for the campaigns (which is a legitimate business model, and no different from websites acting as a man-in-the-middle vehicle for the ads of others). I also prefer Brave’s ad model since it leaves the user’s privacy intact and would personally prefer it if everyone adapted a similar model.

        > How can Brave just use other company’s blocklists

        Because those lists are public domain, to be used by any adblocker. Brave does not use lists that are not explicitly said to be free to use by anyone who wishes to do so. Same goes for any adblocker, e.g. in AdBlock Plus, the lists are not their own, in uBlock Origin, the vast majority of the lists are not maintained by gorhill himself.

        > How can Brave put out a fork with minimal patches and not contribute one iota upstream

        That’s easily explained: First things first, Brave is not a “minimal fork”. Their adblocker written in Rust, IPFS support, Brave Rewards, their fingerprinting defenses etc. are all original and none of these changes can be described as minimal. Brave exists to offer a privacy-respecting fork of Chromium (which most Chromium forks are not, I mean privacy-respecting) and to push for a more ethical model of advertising, where all parties involved earn a share (advertisers, ad distributor, user).

        As for why they do not contribute much upstream? Again, please use your brain. None of the significant changes of Brave listed above are desired by Google. If and when Brave’s developers detect Chromium bugs, they do report them and contribute to upstream. However, if you think the findings of a small team (of whose members most work on features exclusive to Brave) such as the one working at Brave Software can ever contribute as much as the behemoths Google or Microsoft, you are frankly delusional. Do you also berate other small browser projects like Vivaldi for not contributing much to upstream, I wonder?

        > How can Brave justify telemetry on their minimal fork

        Because, contrary to what you claim, there are significant changes in Brave. Also, they change various parts of the browser in major and minor ways, and even small code snippets may lead to crashes. Moreover, they have to constantly merge new Chromium releases and since they do apply changes to Chromium, these new merges may lead to crashes that went undetected before a release got published.

        It should also be noted that Brave’s telemetry, compared to e.g. Firefox, is fairly mild and can actually be turned off in Brave’s settings, whereas FF has both hidden and system level telemetry.

        I have answered your five questions now as if they were genuine and relevant, happy now? May I ask one counter-question:

        Why are you wasting my time with idiotic trolling and pseudo-questions that could have been easily answered by yourself if you had used any of your two brain cells?

      2. Ironmectin said on September 19, 2021 at 9:42 am
        Reply

        Have you ever considered not replying? You could have easily not posted your idiotic trolling and pseudo-question about Firefox’s branded product if you used your one brain cell. Firefox has clearly been living in your head rent-free for far too long. Seek some help

      3. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 3:32 pm
        Reply

        @Ironmection

        Stop the trolling, you are not contributing anything here. I have refuted your allegations-dressed-up-as-questions already, give it a rest already.

      4. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 9:45 am
        Reply

        *Blink and Gecko rendering engines

      5. TractorDepot said on September 19, 2021 at 11:45 am
        Reply

        > You are talking about a minor gimmick feature

        And there we have it. Iron Heart agrees that Brave introduces minor gimmicks. This is true, most of Brave’s changes are gimmicks

      6. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 3:42 pm
        Reply

        @TractorDepot

        You are talking from a place of ignorance. Look up Brave’s adblocker which utilizes Rust and the only one that does CNAME uncloaking on Chromium, look up their fingerprinting defenses, look up the included IPFS support etc. None of these are gimmicks.

        The Tor feature is a gimmick though and HAS to be one because Chromium-based browsers can’t imitate the fingerprint of a Gecko-based browser reliably, they are way too different. If Tor were based on e.g. Ungoogled Chromium, Brave could probably reliably imitate it. The way it is now, it is a technical impossibility making the feature a gimmick out of necessity.

        Also, assuming you are one of the Deplatformingfox users trolling against Brave here, please understand that Deplatformingfox doesn’t even get very basic security concepts right in the year of the lord 2021:

        https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html

        So even if Brave were a total gimmick, which it isn’t, it would still be vastly superior in terms of web compatibility, performance, and security when compared to Deplatformingfox. Once Mozilla catches up to Chromium we’ll talk about supposed “gimmicks”, not before. Clean up your own house before you outright shite on on your neighbor’s doorstep.

      7. deWormer said on September 19, 2021 at 4:40 pm
        Reply

        Brave is run by an advertising company funded by venture capitalists that extorts content providers. It adds gimmicks like cname uncloaking for it’s adblocking so it can improve the returns on it’s extortion, and it adds gimmicks like limiting cookie lifespans for seven days, but ignores simple prolongation attacks and that they only covered one type of cookie setting, leaving a giant door open – it’s all about bedazzling the ignorant horsepaste lovers, just like their farbling – so many holes, nothing is ever what it seems. It’s a pig with lipstick on

      8. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 9:12 am
        Reply

        @deWormer

        > Brave is run by an advertising company funded by venture capitalists that extorts content providers.

        So is Firefox, chuckle. They get all their funding from Google, nemesis of online privacy. I see little complaints about that, hypocrite. You also make it seem like Brave is solely funded by “venture capitalists” which is false. However, since the project is crypto-related, crypto-related investments existing at all should be unsurprising.

        Also, read my comment above. “Content providers” do not incur losses from Brave that would be any different from those incurred by any other adblocker.

        > It adds gimmicks like cname uncloaking for it’s adblocking so it can improve the returns on it’s extortion,

        Wow, you manage to make a privacy improvement that is totally in favor of the user sound like a bad thing. Absolutely retarded. I appreciate their efforts to improve their adblocker.

        Also, when uBlock Origin introduced the same feature and when it only worked in Firefox then, it was the biggest shit ever and everyone here celebrated it. When Brave does the exact same thing, it is called “extortion” just because of Brave Rewards (which have zilch to do with any ad displayed on websites). Hypocrisy much?

        > and it adds gimmicks like limiting cookie lifespans for seven days, but ignores simple prolongation attacks and that they only covered one type of cookie setting, leaving a giant door open

        You seem to overlook the fact that a) they have to make concessions towards web compatibility for everyday users and b) that users are also protected by ephemeral storage in this regard.

        > it’s all about bedazzling the ignorant horsepaste lovers, just like their farbling – so many holes, nothing is ever what it seems. It’s a pig with lipstick on

        Still better than Deplatformingfox, though (my negative comment about this rival browser below seems to have earned me your irrational ire):

        https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ofnnlb/brave_browser_is_it_as_unsecure_as_the_firefox/h4ff0vr/?context=3

      9. Ayy said on September 20, 2021 at 3:15 pm
        Reply

        how do you come to the conclusion that cname uncloaking is a gimmick when websites have been using DNS to bypass host/network blocking of their ads? furthermore the more money advertisers lose the better the internet will be.

      10. ChromeFan said on September 19, 2021 at 5:00 pm
        Reply

        @IronHeart Vivaldi contribute more to Chromium than Brave, and that is a fact.

      11. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 5:37 pm
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        Source please? Whatever Vivaldi contributes, I get the impression that the troll above insinuates that small browser projects should contribute at the level of Google or Microsoft, which is a total non-starter for obvious reasons. Also, whatever Brave contributes has zero to do with my reasons for using the browser!? I use it for its own features, not for whatever patches they submit to upstream.

      12. ChromeFan said on September 20, 2021 at 12:16 am
        Reply

        https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:AUTHORS

        I was just pointing out that Vivaldi contributes more.

        Go down to the companies and you can see Vivaldi. Although Brave (4) has more individual contributors than Vivaldi (1).

    2. @Ironmectin said on September 20, 2021 at 12:00 pm
      Reply

      Yet another comment section is hijacked by Iron Heart.

      When will you guys learn? Please STOP feeding the troll. Just ignore him.

      Thanks in advance.

      1. Yash said on September 20, 2021 at 2:34 pm
        Reply

        Iron Heart can be stopped by only one way – bring the quotes said by him before and put them forward now which explains some of his stupid theories. For e.g. in this article ‘https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/17/firefox-experiment-is-testing-bing-as-the-default-search-engine/’ he questioned Startpage and yet in this article ‘https://www.ghacks.net/2021/06/17/2021-looks-to-become-another-record-year-for-the-duckduckgo-search-engine/’ he said something opposite. Iron Heart contradictions in full swing there. That’s one way to stop the troll. Next time do this instead.

      2. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 3:39 pm
        Reply

        @Yash & the other troll above

        So, this * [Editor: removed] says that I am “hijacking the comment section”. But what really happened, for literally everyone to see? I said that Mozilla’s VPN is a cheap rebranding effort, which it is, since the service is 100% operated by Mullvad – Mozilla just lends its brand to them here and receives easy cash based on that. Why should anyone reward this? The ethical thing would be to purchase the service from the one that actually operates it, not from some leech that just gave its brand. I thought this was it, and originally wanted to leave it at that. But what happened then? Some retard came in and bashed Brave out of nowhere, totally off-topic, just because it is known that I use the browser.

        1 day and 4 * [Editor: removed, do we really need to discuss this again..] later (every captain obvious troll excluding the valid post of @Ayy), I am accused to hijack the comment section because I made the mistake to write (admittedly, slightly annoyed) factual replies to the trolls. Question: How stupid are you? People can read this conversation and form their own opinion based on that.

        And @Yash (who frenetically tries to prove that I am a malicious liar of sorts, give it a fucking rest), there is circumstantial evidence that StartPage is not as privacy-respecting as they claim to be, HOWEVER their official privacy policy legally binds them, and this policy is OK compared to the official policy of Google. So if someone relies on Google results, might as well give them a shot, since if it comes to light that they are not as privacy-respecting as claim they are, they would at least be in trouble legally, whereas Google openly admits that they are spying on their users. I give them the benefit of the doubt, but I am NOT uncritical of them.

        This is the difference to YOU, pal. When you decide to use a service, you become uncritical of it and defend it as if your life depended on it. Remember the one time where I showed you that the data mining company Tesonet is actually behind the “Proton” products? Pepperidge farm remembers. You wasted pages and pages being in denial, defending a f*cking data mining company as if they were white knights of privacy. You also trust Mozilla, enemy of internet freedom, who is not providing any privacy in their browser by default, letting users fingerprint themselves while trying to fix their mess. You also have a very warped understanding of what an attack surface is and why reducing it does not necessarily make you any less fingerprintable etc. YOU, PAL have a track record of idiotic posts to the point of defending data mining companies, you are in no position to criticize me even if I made a mistake once or twice.

        I still prefer the company that would be in trouble for violating my privacy (even if circumstantial evidence points to them not taking privacy as seriously as they let on) to the one that openly admits violating my privacy, asking for my consent for their violations. I always stay vigilant, and do not trust anyone completely, while you obviously do.

      3. Yash said on September 20, 2021 at 6:17 pm
        Reply

        I would keep this short as a user has already said “Have you ever considered not replying?”

        “I said that Mozilla’s VPN is a cheap rebranding effort, which it is, since the service is 100% operated by Mullvad – Mozilla just lends its brand to them here and receives easy cash based on that. Why should anyone reward this?”
        Don’t think anyone was rewarding Mozilla when you wrote your comment first. It is a rebrand and everyone knows it and nobody is praising Mozilla for that. If Mozilla benefits from this partnership then so does Mullvad. Simple as that. If an organisation is offering a service which by the way is from a very good company who is happy about it, then be happy dude. You don’t have to be grumpy about that in the first place, that’s just my opinion.

        When you said everyone a troll, please don’t include ChromeFan. I love ChromeFan avatar comments, they’re hilarious.

        What you wrote about StartPage is what I think, so that’s one thing in common. But its you who unnecessarily started sharing some links about StartPage in direct contradiction to what you wrote earlier about it, and I just raised that in the last comment. That’s it.

        You can say whatever about Proton, Tesonet(the links you shared before were inconclusive and GitHub thread proves it which I shared in the past) and other services and what not. I don’t roll that way. I just don’t believe someone easily. Brave, Mozilla and every company included. Now I use Mullvad but its not because Proton is bad and this is the big difference between you and me, regardless of what you wrote and accused me of.

        Have a nice Monday.

      4. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 7:40 pm
        Reply

        @Yash

        You see, a little tale to illustrate how our exchange re. Proton Technologies AG went:

        IH: “Eww, this smells like shit, such a strong stain from their dishonesty.”

        Yash: “No, no, no… I refuse to smell it unless you show me the pile of dung, until then, I refuse to smell what I somehow seem to smell.”

        IH: “Sorry bro, I can’t show you the pile of dung, they are hiding it away in the building.”

        That’s literally how it went. I show you dozens and dozens of shady connections between the two companies, going as far as having shared employees at the highest levels and having their applications signed by each other, and sharing the same office etc. But you refuse to accept it until and unless the company officially admits to the shady connection. I mean, wait long and prosper then, they won’t admit it as it endangers their business. You were strongly demanding proof straight from the horse’s mouth, and I showed you their trail of destroyed evidence in response (thankfully documented by others). Demanding me to show hard proof when the company already purged all references from their pages is one hell of a call, you see. It’s hard to show something conclusively when they go out of their way to hide the business connection. As for their “refutations” on GitHub, they were all written by employees of the company, and to me seemed utterly unconvincing since they failed to disprove the business connection.

        Please also realize that this is not a court martial, I don’t have to walk the extra mile and prove to you that the pile of dung undeniably exists. That’s not my job. The scope of my argument is ultimately just one’s choice to trust or not to trust the service. Nothing more, nothing less. When I get to see, let’s say, convincing hints that something is off, then there are also other competitive services where no such rumors persist, and I choose to go to them rather than running a risk. I don’t need to hear it from the horse’s mouth or conclusively prove it beyond all doubt for my own choice to be made, for I am not a judge, I am just a customer. The way I see it, YOU would have had to convince ME why I should trust them when there are competitors that don’t seem to be stained by similar allegations. Anyway, I’ll put this to rest, neither of us use the service as of now, and I think Mullvad is a great choice because they are comparatively transparent, including their ownership.

        As for StartPage, again, please consider the scope of my comments here:

        1. Am I, or have I ever been, an employee of the company? Nope.

        2. Do they have much competition in terms of search engines fetching their results from Google? Nope.

        3. Is their privacy policy OK? Yep.

        Of course, I cannot 100% vouch for them in any way as I have not been associated with their business and don’t ultimately know whether or not they are true to their word. If and when I recommend to use them, this recommendation is based on their official privacy policy. My recommendation is also influenced by the fact that there is not much competition as far as search engines fetching their results from Google are concerned. If privacy is a concern, Google itself should be out, agreed? Well then, what choice do the privacy-conscious have, if Google-based results are a requirement? You have not much choice aside from them.

        If they should be scumbags doing the opposite of what they promise, this is their problem, not mine, and not that of my prior recommendation. Based on what is officially published from them, and known about them NOW, I have recommended them, this recommendation being aided by the lack of competition. If there were competitors, I would probably abstain from them and proceed as with the VPN providers above.

        Since none of us here are associated with the companies in question, you, Yash, should not put that much stock in our recommendations as to read them as absolute endorsements, because they are not. They are best effort opinions, and just because a service is recommended here (partially because of the privacy policy, partially because there is hardly any competition), does not mean that there can be no criticism, no doubts going forward. I recommended them to the best of my knowledge above Google, and I stick to that unless they are shown to be scumbags at some point. Do I trust them totally? Nope, as with almost all services I personally use myself, I don’t. Like the best effort opinions I write down here, these were just my best effort decisions for myself.

      5. Yash said on September 20, 2021 at 10:03 pm
        Reply

        I shared GitHub thread before which was from PrivacyTools(not from company itself) which had all your links. Search Proton Tesonet Github PrivacyTools on Google and you’ll find the thread, already I’ve shared the link before, not going to do it again. Up to you to read that thread, if not then please continue your ranting.

        “YOU would have had to convince ME why I should trust them when there are competitors that don’t seem to be stained by similar allegations.”
        Lol

        “As for StartPage, again, please consider the scope of my comments here:

        1. Am I, or have I ever been, an employee of the company? Nope.

        2. Do they have much competition in terms of search engines fetching their results from Google? Nope.

        3. Is their privacy policy OK? Yep.

        Of course, I cannot 100% vouch for them in any way as I have not been associated with their business and don’t ultimately know whether or not they are true to their word. If and when I recommend to use them, this recommendation is based on their official privacy policy. My recommendation is also influenced by the fact that there is not much competition as far as search engines fetching their results from Google are concerned. If privacy is a concern, Google itself should be out, agreed? Well then, what choice do the privacy-conscious have, if Google-based results are a requirement? You have not much choice aside from them.

        If they should be scumbags doing the opposite of what they promise, this is their problem, not mine, and not that of my prior recommendation. Based on what is officially published from them, and known about them NOW, I have recommended them, this recommendation being aided by the lack of competition. If there were competitors, I would probably abstain from them and proceed as with the VPN providers above.

        Since none of us here are associated with the companies in question, you, Yash, should not put that much stock in our recommendations as to read them as absolute endorsements, because they are not. They are best effort opinions, and just because a service is recommended here (partially because of the privacy policy, partially because there is hardly any competition), does not mean that there can be no criticism, no doubts going forward. I recommended them to the best of my knowledge above Google, and I stick to that unless they are shown to be scumbags at some point. Do I trust them totally? Nope, as with almost all services I personally use myself, I don’t. Like the best effort opinions I write down here, these were just my best effort decisions for myself.”
        Don’t know what you’re smoking which made you write this.

        I didn’t endorse StartPage, and certainly didn’t trashed it. You first questioned StartPage although you said something another article which suggest otherwise. And then you wrote all this. I’m saying this as a friend, please take some reading lessons.

      6. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 7:54 am
        Reply

        @Yash

        > Don’t know what you’re smoking which made you write this.

        I tried to be fair here and explain my reasoning, that’s all… but apparently you don’t like this. Seems like you prefer being outright trashed for your nonsense by me. OK, I will revert to this.

      7. Yash said on September 21, 2021 at 8:23 am
        Reply

        “I tried to be fair here and explain my reasoning, that’s all… but apparently you don’t like this.”
        Questioning StartPage, okay far enough, but also praising them in a previous article, and then writing whole shitload about it when it wasn’t needed. This is really embarassing from your part. For more info read my first comment on this thread and from there read your own comments, and see yourself being fair lol.

        “Seems like you prefer being outright trashed for your nonsense by me. OK, I will revert to this.”
        Outright trashed for nonsense – how good of you to mention yourself. Maybe time has come to think of priorities in your life, which doesn’t include writing nonsense first and then doing it all over again when your contradictions were exposed for everyone to see :-)

      8. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 12:02 pm
        Reply

        @Yash

        Dude, you are just pathetic. Just because I recommend them over Google (what a high bar…) doesn’t make me uncritical of them, or makes me refuse to listen to certain allegations. Get that into your empty skull, I am NOT like you. I don’t just use a service without ever questioning it (like you with Tesonet, what a choice… and you still think you can judge the recommendations of others hahahaha). Plus, I have already mentioned the lack of valid alternatives leading to a recommendation that I myself am not 100% comfortable with, so no need to rinse and repeat.
        Also, contradictions my ass. The world is just not black and white like that. They may well be better than Google (at least officially) but this does not mean that I am suddenly blind and deaf like you. I have zero qualms recommending them over Google because there is at least a chance that they are true to their word, however remote, whereas Google is a KNOWN offender. I write what I write here to the best of my knowledge and abilities!
        What did you contribute here so far? Defending a fucking data mining company, promoting Googlezilla, and having idiotic, unfounded, completely wrong ideas about what an attack surface is. That’s it. Great track record so far, you absolute moron. Ask all the people I have helped here on gHacks while you wrote your bullshit, you’ll be surprised to find out that the always-the-very-same-detractors spamming my comments are not representative of the whole gHacks readership. Has anyone thanked you so far? Have you ever successfully supported anyone here? I only read meaningless bullshit coming from you, and insults + allegations howled at me. Just fantastic.

      9. Yash said on September 21, 2021 at 2:11 pm
        Reply

        This is you Iron Heart with two comments about StartPage in one article – https://www.ghacks.net/2021/06/17/2021-looks-to-become-another-record-year-for-the-duckduckgo-search-engine/

        “Consider StartPage, it uses Google. This way you are not handing over your searches to Google and still get Google results. Cheers.”
        and
        “The owners of StartPage, System1, have also bought the browser Waterfox some time ago, and to this day, nothing has changed for that browser. It doesn’t phone home to any StartPage domain. Yet the fear mongering continues unabated…

        StartPage has a privacy policy, people should just read it and then decide whether or not they want to use the service. As far as I can tell, they are not any better or worse than DuckDuckGo, and if people find Google results more useful (DuckDuckGo uses Bing), then StartPage wins.”
        Actually second comment had something to say about Brave too, but you know leave it at that.

        And then this is again you here in this article – https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/17/firefox-experiment-is-testing-bing-as-the-default-search-engine/ saying this about StartPage –

        “http://techrights.org/wiki/Startpage

        You have a talent for trusting the wrong people, I suppose”

        So yeah do whatever you want, write whole shitload again trying to justify your own comments about StartPage. You foolishly shared a link and now saying ‘OH LOOK I DIDN’T SAY THIS OR THAT OR THOSE, YOU’RE A TROLL’
        Enjoy your own contradictory quotes.

        About Proton read this thread – https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/928 which has all your false theories being proved false back in 2019.

        “Dude, you are just pathetic. Just because I recommend them over Google (what a high bar…) doesn’t make me uncritical of them, or makes me refuse to listen to certain allegations. Get that into your empty skull, I am NOT like you. I don’t just use a service without ever questioning it (like you with Tesonet, what a choice… and you still think you can judge the recommendations of others hahahaha). Plus, I have already mentioned the lack of valid alternatives leading to a recommendation that I myself am not 100% comfortable with, so no need to rinse and repeat.
        Also, contradictions my ass. The world is just not black and white like that. They may well be better than Google (at least officially) but this does not mean that I am suddenly blind and deaf like you. I have zero qualms recommending them over Google because there is at least a chance that they are true to their word, however remote, whereas Google is a KNOWN offender. I write what I write here to the best of my knowledge and abilities!
        What did you contribute here so far? Defending a fucking data mining company, promoting Googlezilla, and having idiotic, unfounded, completely wrong ideas about what an attack surface is. That’s it. Great track record so far, you absolute moron. Ask all the people I have helped here on gHacks while you wrote your bullshit, you’ll be surprised to find out that the always-the-very-same-detractors spamming my comments are not representative of the whole gHacks readership. Has anyone thanked you so far? Have you ever successfully supported anyone here? I only read meaningless bullshit coming from you, and insults + allegations howled at me. Just fantastic.”
        Iron Heart in meltdown when confronted with own contradictions lol. Again if you don’t have something credible to say, don’t bother replying.

      10. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 8:02 pm
        Reply

        @Yash

        Where is the contradiction? Where did I say that they are 100% trustworthy (or beyond the level of DuckDuckGo, whom I also don’t trust completely, as the CEO brokered data before he started the new business endeavor)? Where do you read a strong endorsement?

        I said that they are better than Google, wohooo! Guess what, I do stick to that. I pointed to their privacy policy as my reference for using them, I stick to that as well. It is also true that there is not much of a choice.

        Again, just because I recommend them over Google (and stick to that) does not mean that there can be no doubts going forward. I was also unaware of the Techrights website when I wrote the other comments, and before had only scarcely heard of transgressions of the company behind StartPage, HOWEVER, I would still give them a shot over Google because of their privacy policy and the lack of alternatives.

        Last but not least, nobody forces you to read my comments. Nobody forces you to take the recommendations seriously, no matter which way they go. Nobody except you believes that the recommendations given here are anything more than best effort opinions, given out free of charge as public comments. Nobody would deny that new information coming in might change a recommendation (although in this case, I would still recommend them over Google, so…). etc. pp. I am too tired to repeat.

        > Iron Heart in meltdown when confronted with own contradictions lol. Again if you don’t have something credible to say, don’t bother replying.

        I am not in meltdown over my alleged “contradictions” since I STILL recommend StartPage over Google, and since I am not EVER uncritical of the services I use. Nothing has changed for me. If I am in meltdown, it is because of the repeated unnecessary discussions I am forced to have with you, discussions that contribute absolute zilch, waste my time, and as usual lead nowhere.

        Also, I think you are a dishonest hypocrite. You have recommended, and defended page after page, a data mining company (Tesonet). You did not ever rescind your recommendation of them. However, strangely enough, shortly after I have revealed the strong hints to you that something might be off, you quietly switched from ProtonVPN to Mullvad, and yet you say you would STILL recommend ProtonVPN. You are still publicly lying to others out of pride (“I never make mistakes!”) while in private quietly departing from your prior choice, how would you call that? You are a lying hypocrite, at least I publicly reveal my reasoning here.

      11. Yash said on September 21, 2021 at 10:40 pm
        Reply

        Don’t know what on earth you’re smoking, but I do need that so I can have same pleasure you get on daily basis.

        This is a user asking about search engines – “I can’t even use Google as they block my VPN. No loss.

        Use DDG, but not really happy with it.

        Are there any search engines out there that are not as slow as 3 legged dog (no offense to the poor dog), from Prison Island, that don’t censor the hell out of results?”
        I answered by saying try StartPage, which I don’t use(only tried it the first time I heard of it to check what it is), yet you came out of nowhere and wrote shitload. Link again is – https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/17/firefox-experiment-is-testing-bing-as-the-default-search-engine/
        User asking an alternative to DDG, I said take a look at StartPage and then Irony Heart came trolling. Even in this comment you said “Again, just because I recommend them over Google (and stick to that) does not mean that there can be no doubts going forward. I was also unaware of the Techrights website when I wrote the other comments, and before had only scarcely heard of transgressions of the company behind StartPage, HOWEVER, I would still give them a shot over Google because of”
        You stupidly said unaware of Techrights website, which perfectly sums you up. First stupidly mentioning stupid websites like Techright, Privacy Watchdog, Madainwhatever, Proton trashing sites and nonsense reddit thread(which by the way exposed your lies although you focused on selected false comments) and then blaming this all on someone else by saying Oh I wasn’t aware. WTF are you doing? Anyway now I definitely know you’re a stupid person who doesn’t check websites he is putting forward and starts questioning everything foolishly, and even worse admitting all this.

        “Where did I say that they are 100% trustworthy (or beyond the level of DuckDuckGo, whom I also don’t trust completely, as the CEO brokered data before he started the new business endeavor)? Where do you read a strong endorsement?”
        Where did I said you’re endorsing? Lying as if your life depends on it, eh.

        I do need the name of your drug so I can report it to ‘authorities’.

        “Last but not least, nobody forces you to read my comments. Nobody forces you to take the recommendations seriously, no matter which way they go. Nobody except you believes that the recommendations given here are anything more than best effort opinions, given out free of charge as public comments. Nobody would deny that new information coming in might change a recommendation (although in this case, I would still recommend them over Google, so…). etc. pp. I am too tired to repeat.”
        WTF are you ranting? Nobody forcing to you rant stupid man, and yet you’re doing it and blaming it on me, definitely Irony diapers need to be brought here, a jumbo diaper to be exact.

        “Also, I think you are a dishonest hypocrite. You have recommended, and defended page after page, a data mining company (Tesonet). You did not ever rescind your recommendation of them. However, strangely enough, shortly after I have revealed the strong hints to you that something might be off, you quietly switched from ProtonVPN to Mullvad, and yet you say you would STILL recommend ProtonVPN. You are still publicly lying to others out of pride (“I never make mistakes!”) while in private quietly departing from your prior choice, how would you call that? You are a lying hypocrite, at least I publicly reveal my reasoning here.”
        Again writing Data mining company although all your lies have been exposed. You do need jumbo diapers. Read that GitHub thread first which had all your stupid links and supposedly good ‘charts and graphs’ to prove Proton is a trash company. You’ve added nothing on this topic ever since I mentioned that GitHub thread in another article which is certainly ironic and expected. Once your lies were exposed, you’re just ranting from that point on.

        “However, strangely enough, shortly after I have revealed the strong hints to you that something might be off, you quietly switched from ProtonVPN to Mullvad, and yet you say you would STILL recommend ProtonVPN. You are still publicly lying to others out of pride (“I never make mistakes!”) while in private quietly departing from your prior choice, how would you call that? You are a lying hypocrite, at least I publicly reveal my reasoning here.”
        Irony Heart I’m still using Proton, thing is now I’ve started using Mullvad along with it. Plus if you have to trash a service like Proton, better put some credible evidence first. Your previous links were trash and were proven false two years ago. Time to put three layers of diapers before commenting again.

        If you don’t have something credible to say which you haven’t in long time, then don’t embarass yourself and certainly don’t lose your sleep over proving something which you can’t, even after your pathetic attempts. Ranting is not the answer. Either post good links which haven’t been proven false already or don’t reply and write another meaningless comment.

      12. Iron Heart said on September 22, 2021 at 10:39 am
        Reply

        @Yash

        > Don’t know what on earth you’re smoking, but I do need that so I can have same pleasure you get on daily basis.

        Can only help the quality of yours posts, so I guess I should give you some of that good stuff. /s

        > You stupidly said unaware of Techrights website, which perfectly sums you up.

        Do… do you have reading comprehension issues? I wasn’t aware of the Techrights website AT ALL before. And yes, even though this is unfathomable to you, new info coming in could very well alter a recommendation previously given (although, due to a lack of alternatives, in this case it hasn’t). That’s called being able to process new information. You should theoretically have this ability as well.

        > First stupidly mentioning stupid websites like Techright, Privacy Watchdog, Madainwhatever, Proton trashing sites and nonsense reddit thread(which by the way exposed your lies although you focused on selected false comments) and then blaming this all on someone else by saying Oh I wasn’t aware. WTF are you doing? Anyway now I definitely know you’re a stupid person who doesn’t check websites he is putting forward and starts questioning everything foolishly, and even worse admitting all this.

        Dude, I am able to read the Techrights website, and I did read it. Surprise, surprise. I was unaware of its EXISTENCE before, how can I read a website of whose existence I didn’t know? Care to explain? Are you nuts? I said that you are trusting the wrong people, implying that I did read the content of the Techrights website which was negative reports about StartPage.

        Also, just because websites happen to disagree with your (stupid) choices, doesn’t make them stupid automatically. But they have to be outright stupid because you think you have made the one and only, smart choice, correct? Uhm, no, you didn’t. I see you describing stupid and retarded choices here.

        And the refutations written by Proton employees on Reddit and GitHub were totally, 100% unconvincing, and failed to disprove the allegations laid out before them. The only way you can possibly find them convincing is when you desperately WANT to believe that it is true, because you never make the wrong choices of course.

        > Again writing Data mining company although all your lies have been exposed.

        Exposed by whom? You? Their own employees writing unconvincing refutations and doing massive damage control?

        > You’ve added nothing on this topic ever since I mentioned that GitHub thread in another article which is certainly ironic and expected. Once your lies were exposed, you’re just ranting from that point on.

        Dude, I am just a human being. Your empty skull would drain the strength from ANYONE sooner or later. I eventually stopped replying because I saw that the “discussion” was leading nowhere, and I will probably do the same thing here eventually as well. I have already told you that I do not buy into their damage control posts, and apparently neither did most who read them. And you already have forgotten about the thing I wrote about me not really having to walk the extra mile to “prove” anything to you beyond all doubt. I don’t trust such a service if this high amount of shady business connections comes up AND alternatives exist

        > Irony Heart I’m still using Proton, thing is now I’ve started using Mullvad along with it.

        Yeah, I believe that (not).

        > Plus if you have to trash a service like Proton, better put some credible evidence first.

        Read the tale above again. I can’t present to you what was purged by them. The amount of shady connections shown to me was enough for me to never consider them again, any admission to it (which will never come) would just be the cherry on the cake.

        > If you don’t have something credible to say which you haven’t in long time, then don’t embarass yourself and certainly don’t lose your sleep over proving something which you can’t, even after your pathetic attempts. Ranting is not the answer. Either post good links which haven’t been proven false already or don’t reply and write another meaningless comment.

        Dude, “meaningless” are only your sad attempts to save the face of a data mining company because you somehow trusted them (yet switched after what was said by me, how come?). And what I said was not disproven. You have already linked to their damage control, I invite anyone to read this unconvincing crap and then form whatever opinion based on that.

      13. Yash said on September 22, 2021 at 2:40 pm
        Reply

        Again another unnecessary comment, so let’s begin –

        “Can only help the quality of yours posts, so I guess I should give you some of that good stuff. /s”
        If you think this way, then god or drugs or dung may bless your soul. This also explains your never ending false claims.

        First about StartPage, I’ve been clear from the start – I don’t use StartPage. A user asked and specifically said Google can’t run because of VPN and DDG results are not good. So I said –
        ‘How about Startpage? Haven’t used it much but read somewhere – its Google without tracking. So that may solve VPN issue.’
        In these lines these words have been used – ‘much’ and ‘read somewhere’ & ‘may’ which clearly indicates I’m not confident about it and basically I’ve just put a name out to see if it can help.

        Then you Irony Heart came trolling. Even in your last comment you said laughable things. So here’s some questions which will put this lame debate to an end –
        Did I praised StartPage which made you write – “trusting the wrong people” ? Answer is clear no.
        What made you share Techright website and then add putting the trust in wrong people when I didn’t made a big deal of StartPage?
        And third why all this nonsense for something which I’ve already said I don’t even use?
        You’re welcome to justify your whole shitload.
        Then you wrote again about Proton –
        “And the refutations written by Proton employees on Reddit and GitHub were totally, 100% unconvincing, and failed to disprove the allegations laid out before them. The only way you can possibly find them convincing is when you desperately WANT to believe that it is true, because you never make the wrong choices of course.

        Exposed by whom? You? Their own employees writing unconvincing refutations and doing massive damage control?

        Dude, I am just a human being. Your empty skull would drain the strength from ANYONE sooner or later. I eventually stopped replying because I saw that the “discussion” was leading nowhere, and I will probably do the same thing here eventually as well. I have already told you that I do not buy into their damage control posts, and apparently neither did most who read them. And you already have forgotten about the thing I wrote about me not really having to walk the extra mile to “prove” anything to you beyond all doubt. I don’t trust such a service if this high amount of shady business connections comes up AND alternatives exist

        Read the tale above again. I can’t present to you what was purged by them. The amount of shady connections shown to me was enough for me to never consider them again, any admission to it (which will never come) would just be the cherry on the cake.

        Dude, “meaningless” are only your sad attempts to save the face of a data mining company because you somehow trusted them (yet switched after what was said by me, how come?). And what I said was not disproven. You have already linked to their damage control, I invite anyone to read this unconvincing crap and then form whatever opinion based on that.”

        You didn’t provide any new ‘credible’ source or something like that to back up your claims. GitHub thread shared before is from Privacy Tools, not Proton itself like you said lol.
        So it comes down to this – nothing new except more ranting, nothing there for me to add. So good luck, please continue your pointless ranting.
        Its really easy for me when a user who is questioning a service again and again can’t even provide some sort of evidence to back it up.

      14. Iron Heart said on September 22, 2021 at 6:13 pm
        Reply

        @Yash

        > In these lines these words have been used – ‘much’ and ‘read somewhere’ & ‘may’ which clearly indicates I’m not confident about it and basically I’ve just put a name out to see if it can help.

        The exact same was true for me also in the links you’ve posted, I too only gave a best effort opinion. And you chose to make a big deal out of it, you utter hypocrite.

        > Did I praised StartPage which made you write – “trusting the wrong people” ? Answer is clear no.

        You certainly didn’t mention them in a negative light. And here again, I must say, I praised them neither, yet you chose to make a big deal out of it, hypocrite.

        > What made you share Techright website and then add putting the trust in wrong people when I didn’t made a big deal of StartPage?

        People should know that there could be issues, and that not everything is as it seems with them apparently. No more, no less.

        > And third why all this nonsense for something which I’ve already said I don’t even use?

        Asks the guy who entered this comment thread with a burning desire to discuss StartPage, lol.

        > You didn’t provide any new ‘credible’ source or something like that to back up your claims.

        Again, this is credible enough for me to never ever trust them:

        https://www.docdroid.net/kOP3JAh/tesonet-web-of-lies-pdf

        > GitHub thread shared before is from Privacy Tools, not Proton itself like you said lol.

        I didn’t even say who hosted the discussion (in this case: Privacytools.io)!? It doesn’t matter who hosts their crappy damage control posts, I was referring to the crappy damage control clearly, not to the passive host.

        > Its really easy for me when a user who is questioning a service again and again can’t even provide some sort of evidence to back it up.

        Do I really need to talk again about the fact that they have gone out there and purged most references to Tesonet already? Really? I can’t point to what was purged by them. Their scorched earth tactics when confronted with Tesonet already told me all I needed to know.

        And your so called “evidence” were crappy excuses written by their own employees in the Privacytools.io repo. And then you switched away to Mullvad ahahahahaha….

      15. Yash said on September 22, 2021 at 7:53 pm
        Reply

        “The exact same was true for me also in the links you’ve posted, I too only gave a best effort opinion. And you chose to make a big deal out of it, you utter hypocrite.”
        Just an opinion, fair enough but wait a minute

        “You certainly didn’t mention them in a negative light. And here again, I must say, I praised them neither, yet you chose to make a big deal out of it, hypocrite.”
        “Negative light” – Yep I should mention everything about StartPage from its pros to cons, although I only wrote two lines which were about putting a name forward. Next time if someone mention Brave, I will list all its pros and cons in 8000 words so some stranger on internet doesn’t has to say – ‘didn’t mention them in a negative light’
        You really are naive.

        “People should know that there could be issues, and that not everything is as it seems with them apparently. No more, no less.”
        From your quotes I can understand you have a problem in reading words and definitely understanding them. Do you mention cons of Brave or some issues every time, coz you know people should know that there could be issues?

        “Asks the guy who entered this comment thread with a burning desire to discuss StartPage, lol.”
        It was clear from my first comment in this thread that I was showing contradictory quotes of yours. “Burning desire to discuss StartPage” – yeah I wrote all the paragraphs above although they appear under Iron Heart. In my comments, I only wrote two lines in another article and only used them as reference here. But yeah I’ve written all those thousand words, good job Irony Heart.

        Reading these quotes of yours clearly signals that 8 year old mind of yours can’t properly understand how to have a debate, and most certainly is analysing every single word, nevermind a sentence, but is also ignoring his own comments and making false theories himself. Since that’s the case please use your Brave browser, and watch some videos about How to behave like an adult and more importantly How to have conversations like an adult. Leave your bed for once and do this instead.

        “Again, this is credible enough for me to never ever trust them:

        https://www.docdroid.net/kOP3JAh/tesonet-web-of-lies-pdf
        “I didn’t even say who hosted the discussion (in this case: Privacytools.io)!? It doesn’t matter who hosts their crappy damage control posts, I was referring to the crappy damage control clearly, not to the passive host.”
        “Do I really need to talk again about the fact that they have gone out there and purged most references to Tesonet already? Really? I can’t point to what was purged by them. Their scorched earth tactics when confronted with Tesonet already told me all I needed to know.
        And your so called “evidence” were crappy excuses written by their own employees in the Privacytools.io repo. And then you switched away to Mullvad ahahahahaha….”
        Finally a link you shared, but that chart has already been proven false, two years ago atleast. Didn’t you knew that?

        “Switched away to Mullvad” – write whatever you want naive idiot. I never trashed Mullvad and Proton to begin with, so don’t know why you’re making a big deal? Oh wait that’s your only job in a bunker. I used Brave before, not using it now and I say this confidently it is a trash browser. Used Bromite before, not using it now but I will still say best Chromium browser and only Chromium browser I would recommend. I try different stuff so now I’ve tried another VPN. In your naive mind, if this is a big deal then I feel sorry for you.

      16. ChromeFan said on September 20, 2021 at 6:58 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        Troll calling someone else a troll, hilarious.

        “defend it as if your life depended on it” – just like you do with Brave.

        Google does not openly admit they spy on their users. Why lie? If they did spy, they would get in SERIOUS trouble. In fact, Google is one of the most privacy respecting companies to exist.

        You realise you are also using Chrome? Since Brave is a cheap rebrand of Chrome.

        Also, as a tip from a (supposed troll) to another troll, please try to expand your vocabulary and not use r***** all the time.

      17. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 7:51 pm
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        I don’t think I am a troll, I am not here to incite hatred, I take no pleasure in hatred, and I am not devoid of arguments.

        > “defend it as if your life depended on it” – just like you do with Brave.

        Dude, I am not the first one writing down the facts above. All of the things I said about Brave are public knowledge, easily found online, and if the people asking were really interested in having a discussion and in proper answers, they could have found out very easily. Or I would have replied to a non-trollish inquiry. Instead, they are obviously trolling, trying to provoke me.

        > Google does not openly admit they spy on their users. Why lie? If they did spy, they would get in SERIOUS trouble. In fact, Google is one of the most privacy respecting companies to exist.

        They do, read their privacy policy. Technically you agree to it when you proceed to use them, but this is more or less a forced agreement since they are de facto monopolist in some areas, and ultimately makes it no less unethical. Also, I hope that your last sentence is satire.

        > You realise you are also using Chrome? Since Brave is a cheap rebrand of Chrome.

        And Chrome, in turn, is a rebrand of Chromium. You seem to have no clue about Chromium’s source, from which both Brave and Chrome spring equally. And that Brave is not just a cheap rebrand is evident by its unique features. Such an uninformed sentence warrants no further discussion.

        > Also, as a tip from a (supposed troll) to another troll, please try to expand your vocabulary and not use r***** all the time.

        If you don’t want me to use it, don’t act like one. I’ll use what fits your behavior the best.

      18. ChromeFan said on September 20, 2021 at 9:37 pm
        Reply

        > “Instead, they are obviously trolling, trying to provoke me.”

        This makes you sound like your the victim. Any sane person would not respond, and ignore them. But the number 1 troll on this site (you) doesn’t ignore them. By the way, there is no such thing as provoking on the Internet. You just made that up.

        > “Also, I hope that your last sentence is satire.”
        Acting dumb gets you nowhere. If you can’t appreciate Google’s commitment to privacy and safeguarding of its users data, then you don’t warrant a response.

        > “You seem to have no clue about Chromium’s source”

        Google owns , develops, and maintains Chromium. Your the one who doesn’t have a clue.

        > “Brave is not just a cheap rebrand”

        It is. Nothing unique about Brave. What has been in Brave, has been done in other browsers. Without Google doing all the hard stuff, there would be no Brave, therefore Brave is a cheap rebrand of Chrome.

        How much BAT does Brendan Eich pay you?

      19. HorsePaste said on September 21, 2021 at 7:29 am
        Reply

        > This makes you sound like your the victim

        Iron Heart always plays the victim card when called out

      20. HorsePaste said on September 21, 2021 at 11:50 am
        Reply

        no one can have a discussion with you, because you are a super spreader who rants in enormous posts about irrelevant items, so no-one bothers to take you seriously

      21. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 1:26 pm
        Reply

        @HorsePaste

        That’s horse shit. Also, “called out”, by what arguments exactly? I hope you are not referring to the horse shit that was written before yours. You guys are trolling, for everyone to see, my personal feelings regarding that notwithstanding.

      22. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 8:05 am
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        > This makes you sound like your the victim.

        This makes me sound like I am annoyed, because I am.

        > Any sane person would not respond, and ignore them.

        Perhaps the people responding to your trolling in previous articles were also insane, then.

        > Acting dumb gets you nowhere. If you can’t appreciate Google’s commitment to privacy and safeguarding of its users data, then you don’t warrant a response.

        Just because Google has not had a major breach yet, does not mean that they don’t collect user data. It just means that they protect what they have rather well. I was talking about the collection, though, not about the protection once collected.

        > Google owns , develops, and maintains Chromium. Your the one who doesn’t have a clue.

        False. Chromium is under an open source license, usable by anyone. The only thing Google owns from even Chrome, their Chromium fork, is the registered trademark. They own none of the open source code.

        Use your brain, if they did own the Chromium code, other Chromium-based browsers like Edge, Opera, Vivaldi, or Brave could not legally exist. What you wrote is moronic, sorry.

        > Nothing unique about Brave.

        Native adblocker written in Rust, fingerprinting defenses, native IPFS support, Brave Rewards system etc. pp.

        > How much BAT does Brendan Eich pay you?

        Counter-question: Why do you advertise an anti-privacy organization every step of the way? Are you dumb?

        And to answer your pseudo-question: Just as much as any other Brave user gets via Brave Rewards… So, not enough by far to warrant the time wasted with trolls like you here.

        I use Brave because it meets my needs, it’s what I expect a browser to be. Just like it is with you and Chrome (hahahahaha….).

      23. ChromeFan said on September 21, 2021 at 4:04 pm
        Reply

        > “This makes me sound like I am annoyed, because I am.”

        Annoyed at what exactly? The way you defend Brave is not normal. You make it sound like Brave is a person.

        > “Perhaps the people responding to your trolling”

        What trolling? If I was a troll I would have been banned ages ago. I’m surprised your account is still here with the amount of trolling you.

        > “False”

        The majority of the code belongs to Google. Who do you think works full time on the project? Take out all the code by non Google employees, you still have a usable browser. I cannot believe you haven’t figured this own.

        > “Nothing unique about Brave”

        Which has been done in other browsers, like I said.

        > “Why do you advertise an anti-privacy organization”

        In your eyes, did Google hurt you?

        Once again, you are the troll here, not me. The fact you even respond to ‘supposed’ trolls is very sad. Like someone said above, ignore and move on, however, you can’t seem to comprehend this simple statement.

      24. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 8:19 pm
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        > Annoyed at what exactly?

        The permanent trolling I get under my comments, I guess? Have you nothing else to do?

        > The way you defend Brave is not normal. You make it sound like Brave is a person.

        Nope. I dislike trolls, and I dislike malicious lies being spread when the facts are already known. If you lot were interested in real discussion (you are not), you could easily have found out that what you say is inaccurate. That you fail to inform yourself, instead wasting your (and by extension my) time with trolling, is just stressful, annoying, and ultimately just dumb.

        > What trolling? If I was a troll I would have been banned ages ago. I’m surprised your account is still here with the amount of trolling you.

        What trolling of yours? Amnesia much?

        https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/13/mozilla-reverse-engineers-microsoft-edges-default-browser-setting-behavior/#comment-4503763

        https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/07/firefox-92-0-release-here-is-what-is-new-and-changed/#comment-4503416

        Also, if you haven’t noticed, I am the only one here even attempting to make an argument. Why my nick is still allowed to post? Why are YOU TROLLS still allowed to post? You should have been taken down long before anything I wrote was.

        > The majority of the code belongs to Google.

        Legally? No.

        The only thing they own is Chrome’s trademark.

        > Who do you think works full time on the project? Take out all the code by non Google employees, you still have a usable browser.

        Google is the biggest contributor but can’t claim legal ownership of the open source code due to the open source license it is distributed under. If Google ceased to contribute, Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung, Opera, Intel etc. probably would continue a fork of the code, they all rely on it after all.

        > Which has been done in other browsers, like I said.

        This is factually incorrect. Show me the IPFS support, the farbling-based anti-fingerprinting defenses, the native adblocker written in Rust etc. of other browsers, I am waiting.

        > In your eyes, did Google hurt you?

        Myself? I am not using their services if I can avoid them, so nope. But there is a reason why I don’t use them – they are a known offender of user privacy (even you seem to agree, hahahaha: https://www.ghacks.net/2021/08/13/firefox-will-block-insecure-downloads-soon-by-default/#comment-4502013 ).

        > Once again, you are the troll here, not me.

        Good joke.

        > The fact you even respond to ‘supposed’ trolls is very sad. Like someone said above, ignore and move on, however, you can’t seem to comprehend this simple statement.

        Fair enough, maybe I should. It’s not like I am responding to high quality posts by any means.

      25. ChromeFan said on September 21, 2021 at 10:42 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        > “is just stressful, annoying, and ultimately just dumb.”

        Why do reply to EVERY SINGLE comment if it is ‘stressful, annoying, and dumb’? I dont see how replying to a comment is stressful unless you have an emotional attachment to whatever you are commenting about (Brave).

        > “Amnesia much?”

        You are the number 1 troll on this site. It takes one to know one.

        > “This is factually incorrect”

        IPFS support is present in Opera. And can be added to all browsers using this (https://github.com/ipfs/in-web-browsers). Fingerprint protection is available on Firefox, and can be used as a add-on on Chrome. Who cares what programming language the adblocker is written in. Adblock is native in Firefox as well as Chrome. Absolutely nothing unique about Brave. It is just like any Chrome rip-off. Unoriginal and uninspiring.

        > “even you seem to agree”

        Firefox calls itself a ‘private’ browser. If Firefox was a ‘private’ browser, it would use a ‘private’ search engine. According to you privacy freaks. I was just making fun of the situation. EVERYBODY knows that Google is the most respecting and private search engine this planet has seen. You are just a Google hater.

        > “It’s not like I am responding to high quality posts”

        And yours are?

      26. Iron Heart said on September 22, 2021 at 10:11 am
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        > Why do reply to EVERY SINGLE comment if it is ‘stressful, annoying, and dumb’? I dont see how replying to a comment is stressful unless you have an emotional attachment to whatever you are commenting about (Brave).

        Why do you always fantasize about an emotional attachment? If I were emotionally attached, how come that I have a wide range of browsers installed here?

        Why don’t you accept the explanation I gave you, that I dislike lies and trolling when the facts are already known. I also prefer exposing this shit over letting it stand as if it had any legitimacy to it.

        > You are the number 1 troll on this site. It takes one to know one.

        So you don’t deny that you are a troll anymore? Progress! However, how come that you call me a troll still? I am clearly the only one trying to come up with a valid argument here, the other posts are clueless, inflammatory, and hateful to the core. Guess who trolls and who doesn’t…

        > IPFS support is present in Opera. And can be added to all browsers using this (https://github.com/ipfs/in-web-browsers). Fingerprint protection is available on Firefox, and can be used as a add-on on Chrome. Who cares what programming language the adblocker is written in. Adblock is native in Firefox as well as Chrome. Absolutely nothing unique about Brave. It is just like any Chrome rip-off. Unoriginal and uninspiring.

        Great digging you did there, it is just barely starting to resemble an argument. Progress! But no, Brave came up with native IPFS support and Opera hopped on the train. Firefox’s RFP is totally different from Brave’s FP defenses conceptually and Brave is the one first attempting it on a browser that people actually want to use in terms of popularity (Chromium). Firefox and Chrome don’t have native adblocking. Chrome stops ad resources if they exceed a certain performance drain (heavy ad intervention), this is not general adblocking and affects maybe 0.00001% of ads. Firefox has nothing but the weak Disconnect list and you can’t add any custom lists worth their salt, it also does no cosmetic filtering. So, no.

        Last but not least, I have no reason to justify my own choices before you. Like, no reason at all. Do you see me hammering you for the naive man’s choice (Chrome) that is still less feature-rich than what I use? Nope, because I have no time for this type of shit. I am just mentioning some unique features that designate Brave because you made it seem like they just switched the logo out from Chromium, which is retarded.

        > Firefox calls itself a ‘private’ browser. If Firefox was a ‘private’ browser, it would use a ‘private’ search engine.

        > Google is the most respecting and private search engine this planet has seen.

        But if Google is so private like you claim, why did you bash Firefox for using it as default?

        https://www.ghacks.net/2021/08/13/firefox-will-block-insecure-downloads-soon-by-default/#comment-4502013

        > And yours are?

        * [Editor: removed]

      27. ChromeFan said on September 22, 2021 at 1:38 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        > “I dislike lies and trolling”

        Yet this is all you do. Calling me and others trolls, and lieing about Brave’s capabilities. Unbelievable.

        > “So you don’t deny that you are a troll anymore?”

        You called me a troll first. I have NEVER trolled you. If I was a troll I would tell you. Your calling me a troll because I can see through your lies.

        > “Brave came up with native IPFS support and Opera hopped on the train’
        Then it’s not unique to Brave is it? Another lie by Iron Heart.

        > “Brave is the one first attempting it on a browser that people actually want to use in terms of popularity”

        Firefox has more users than Brave. Whats that? Another lie by Iron Heart.

        > “Firefox and Chrome don’t have native adblocking”

        Chrome still blocks ads no matter how it does it. Firefox has native adblocking. Why do you continue to lie about these things. You say you hate lies, yet continue to lie about everything.

        > “Do you see me hammering you for the naive man’s choice (Chrome) that is still less feature-rich than what I use?”

        You started off by calling me a troll (underserved). I don’t care what others think when I use Chrome. Maybe you should not care as well. By feature rich you mean bloat?

        > “But if Google is so private like you claim, why did you bash Firefox for using it as default?”

        Did you forget to put on your reading glasses? Come on. I’ll post it again for you:

        ‘Firefox calls itself a ‘private’ browser. If Firefox was a ‘private’ browser, it would use a ‘private’ search engine. According to you privacy freaks. I was just making fun of the situation.’

        > “* [Editor: removed]”

        What did you say earlier:

        ‘I am not here to incite hatred, I take no pleasure in hatred’

        Is that another lie I sense from Iron Heart? I think it is.

        Please check what the guidelines are for posting (personal attacks will not be tolerate).

        Here I am keeping a cool head (and will continue to do so), and you are personally attacking me, for what? You are making Martin’s job a lot harder.

      28. Iron Heart said on September 22, 2021 at 2:23 pm
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        > Calling me and others trolls

        …because you are.

        > and lieing about Brave’s capabilities.

        Where did I “lie about Brave’s capabilities”? What I said here is 100% accurate and verifiable across the board.

        > I have NEVER trolled you.

        Do I need to link to your troll posts again, or? You are trolling me here, by the way.

        > Then it’s not unique to Brave is it?

        If Brave came first, and Opera later, then Brave pioneered it, not Opera. That others later copy it means absolutely nothing.

        > Chrome still blocks ads no matter how it does it.

        No, it doesn’t. It refuses to load certain elements based on performance stats. Can be ads, can be anything else. As far as ads are concerned, it would be like 0.00001% of all ads or something. Chrome doesn’t block in the sense of having a real adblocker, e.g. uBlock Origin, or AdBlock Plus. Anyone who is not blind can see that Chrome does NOT BLOCK ADS.

        > Firefox has native adblocking.

        No. Hence why forks like LibreWolf have to bundle the adblocker uBlock Origin, because it doesn’t exist in Firefox. FF’s tracking protection is a joke, not an adblocker. As is the case with Chrome, it hardly blocks ANYTHING.

        > I don’t care what others think when I use Chrome.

        Fine, then also stop caring about why I use Brave. Would only be fair then.

        > By feature rich you mean bloat?

        How is adblocking, FP protections, IPFS integration “bloat”? All of this is useful and doesn’t worsen performance, actually, the native adblocker even enhances performance. You don’t know what you are talking about, once again.

        > ‘Firefox calls itself a ‘private’ browser. If Firefox was a ‘private’ browser, it would use a ‘private’ search engine. According to you privacy freaks. I was just making fun of the situation.’

        Firefox uses Google by default. Is Google private according to you, or is it not?

        > Please check what the guidelines are for posting (personal attacks will not be tolerate).

        Calling others a liar, repeatedly and without any good reason, is also a personal attack, yet it went through. Perhaps you too should familiarize yourself with the guidelines, whether they are enforced or not, whether Martin can be bothered, or not.

        > Here I am keeping a cool head (and will continue to do so), and you are personally attacking me, for what? You are making Martin’s job a lot harder.

        How am I personally attacking you? By calling you a troll? If you don’t want to be called such, don’t give me textbook examples of your trolling to point to, and even more importantly, stop trolling ME. And what Martin does or doesn’t delete… is not something I have any influence on, and honestly, I don’t care. I have gotten used to Martin thinking he knows best what is good for my comments, while at the same time letting fairly outrageous and insulting accusations of others (like yours) through. Do I worry about that? Unless a certain equality is established, I don’t. Let him delete what he believes must be deleted according to selectively applied rules.

      29. ChromeFan said on September 22, 2021 at 6:28 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        > “because you are”

        I’m not, but you are. How many times do you have to accuse me of trolling?

        > “Where did I “lie about Brave’s capabilities”?”
        Brave having unique features. That is a LIE. I have already exposed your lies on this matter. There is nothing more to discuss.

        > “You are trolling me here, by the way.”
        Nope, you falsely called me a troll. In fact, you started it.

        > “If Brave came first, and Opera later, then Brave pioneered it, not Opera. That others later copy it means absolutely nothing.”

        The dictionaty definiyion of unique is:
        ‘being the only existing one of its type or, more generally, unusual, or special in some way’

        > “It refuses to load certain elements based on performance stat”

        No matter how it blocks ads, if it blocks ads, it is a adblocker. Just admit you are wrong on this matter and we can move on.

        > “.FF’s tracking protection is a joke, not an adblocker. As is the case with Chrome, it hardly blocks ANYTHING.”

        You admit Firefox and Chrome block ads? Great! We are making some progress.

        > “Fine, then also stop caring about why I use Brave. Would only be fair then.”

        I don’t care if you use Brave or any other browser. You like to spread lies, and move goalposts to suit your arguments. You are not taking your own advise, I see.

        > “All of this is useful and doesn’t worsen performance”

        Making baseless claims, yet again. How do you know? Have you tested it? These are unnecessary features, one can use an extension, or a add on.

        > “Firefox uses Google by default. Is Google private according to you, or is it not?”

        You either cannot digest the information I have given you, or are trolling. Maybe a bit of both

        > “Calling others a liar, repeatedly and without any good reason, is also a personal attack”

        Moving goalposts yet again. Do you never get tired? I exposed your lies.

        > “while at the same time letting fairly outrageous and insulting accusations of others (like yours) through”

        These are not accusations. You keep moving the goalposts to support your ever changing arguments. Just admit you were wrong, and we can both move forward. We both know that’s not going to happen. Keep wasting your time though.

      30. Iron Heart said on September 24, 2021 at 1:24 am
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        Can we put a stop to this train wreck of a conversation? You are undoubtedly a troll, for all to see, I linked to previous examples of your idiotic trolling, and in more recent articles, you have been on your usual trolling spree again. Chrome and Firefox do not block ads. Adblockers are software like uBlock Origin, AdBlock Plus, or included ones like Brave Shields. Everyone accepts that these are adblockers, and in case of the extensions, they are being added to Chrome and Firefox because these browsers don’t block anything (or something along the lines of 0.00001% of ads, which is a pure joke not worth discussing). If you think these browsers have adblockers despite the clear need to install software like uBO or ABP (even admitted by you), joke’s on you. Not worth discussing.

        You are hating on Brave supposedly having no unique features despite their not being any other native adblocker written in Rust (which makes a big performance difference, and is not affected by Manifest V3 extension API changes like your shit will be), or no browser doing farbling-based fingerprinting defenses. Or the IPFS support they pioneered before Opera half-heartedly copied it (which technically means that it is no longer unique, but it clearly was at one point and is still more extensive than what Opera offers). Or Brave Rewards which is 100% unique to it still etc. pp. I don’t even know why you care since you don’t even use Brave, you use Chrome, the naive man’s choice. You also don’t care for my specific reasons to use it. The only reason you remain here is a dumb trolling spree directed against me.

        PS: Nice how you evaded answering my question whether or not you consider Google Search to be privacy-respecting. Was my question too hard to comprehend? :…….D

      31. ChromeFan said on September 24, 2021 at 5:48 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        > “Can we put a stop to this train wreck of a conversation?”
        Sure, just don’t reply. I thought this was ended nearly two days, but apparently not, and you felt the need to reply.

        > “Chrome and Firefox do not block ads”
        They do, but can’t grasp that.

        > “You are hating on Brave supposedly having no unique features”
        Which it does not, but again you can not grasp that. You also don’t know what the word unique means. If it did we would not having this ‘discussion’.

        > “The only reason you remain here is a dumb trolling spree directed against me”
        Nope, you are making up false statements about Brave which are not true. Stop moving the goalposts, admit you were wrong and we can both move on. You need to stop replying to me.

        > “Nice how you evaded answering my question whether or not you consider Google Search to be privacy-respecting”

        Nope. At this point you are trolling. Lets refresh your memory:
        “Did you forget to put on your reading glasses? Come on. I’ll post it again for you:
        ‘Firefox calls itself a ‘private’ browser. If Firefox was a ‘private’ browser, it would use a ‘private’ search engine. According to you privacy freaks. I was just making fun of the situation.’”

        IF you do not want to CONTINUE this conversation, you can STOP replying. Simple. Thank you.

      32. Iron Heart said on September 25, 2021 at 4:52 pm
        Reply

        @ChromeFan

        Stop the misinfo and trolling, OK? You are not convincing anybody with this, same like your Google ads disguised as posts are not taken seriously by anybody here.

        You think Brave has no features that make it unique, and that Firefox and Chrome also have native adblocking etc. 36 million (and growing fast!) Brave users seem to disagree with you. If they are happy with their choice, then why troll? Brave has had no major scandals yet compared to what most people here use, I am happy with the product and that is what matters to me.

      33. ChromeFan said on September 26, 2021 at 3:47 pm
        Reply

        @Iron Heart

        > “Stop the misinfo and trolling, OK?”
        I am here to learn, learn about privcy and maybe venture out and try other browsers. If you feel like I am trolling and spreading misinformation, then I do not know what to say.

        > “You are not convincing anybody with this”

        Who do I need to convince?

        > “Google ads disguised as posts are not taken seriously by anybody here”

        Your posts are Brave ads disguised as posts. They are not taken seriously by anybody here.

        I don’t care if they are taken seriously, or not. I don’t post for validation from other people.

        > “You think Brave has no features that make it unique”

        False. It has features, but they are not unique. The features found in Brave are in other browsers eg ads (not including Chrome here), adblockers, IPFS etc.

        > “Firefox and Chrome also have native adblocking”

        They do. I don’t know what your twisted definition of adblocking is but the dictionary definition is:

        ‘the use of a computer program to prevent advertisements from being displayed on a screen’

        > “36 million (and growing fast!)”

        Good for them. I hope they get more.

        > “Brave users seem to disagree with you. If they are happy with their choice, then why troll?”

        I have not said anything about their users. When I talk about Brave, why does it feel like I have just personally attacked you? This is not normal behaviour and makes you sound like a fanboy.

        You make it sound like I hate Brave. That is not the case, unlike most people on this site, I don’t hate any browser.

      34. Emil Brausewetter said on September 20, 2021 at 7:41 pm
        Reply

        #DeplatformingIronHeart

        Grab your beloved Brave, get married in Gretna Green and disappear into the sunset while watching ads and three BAT fall from the sky.
        And if he didn’t die, he’s still staring at commercials today!

        And from that day forward the fellow readers lived merrily, eating partridge and drinking sweet wine … ?

      35. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 7:56 pm
        Reply

        @Emil Brausewetter

        Counter-proposal: You stop coming out of your troll cave belatedly when all of your friends have already left their BS here. How about that?

        I have never seen “Emil Brausewetter” contribute anything of value here. I put the trolls, including you, in their place and will continue to do so, like it or not.

      36. klara said on September 21, 2021 at 3:17 pm
        Reply

        > [Editor: removed]
        > [Editor: removed, do we really need to discuss this again..]

        Now now, calm down and take your meds: deworming pills, horse paste, ironmectin .. tractor depot has them in stock. Martin sounds like a schoolmaster dealing with a petulant toddler. Just how many times has Martin had to explain things to you. I bet you have emailed him and bitched about things dozens of times, because that’s what bullies and victim-players do .. cry and sob

        Perhaps if you learned some critical thinking and didn’t let Firefox live in your head rent-free, and stopped attacking people, and stopped posted off topic crap, Martin could take a break as well as the rest of us

      37. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 7:40 pm
        Reply

        @klara

        I bullied nobody, my first post was on-topic. Then it went down the off-topic drain, but that was none of my doing. None of the replies to my on-topic comment I got were themselves on-topic in ANY way, in case you haven’t noticed.

        > deworming pills, horse paste, ironmectin .. tractor depot has them in stock.

        The only thing they seem to have in stock are trolls, so add yourself to that list. Even the nicknames chosen are straight from the troll cave. Don’t pretend that it is not so.

        Also, very brave (yeah…) of you to side with the 5 1/2 trolls. And honestly, Martin should have taken down parts of your comment as well out of fairness, as they were insulting as well.

  2. Paul(us) said on September 18, 2021 at 11:22 am
    Reply

    Yes I use surfshark, I think its the best buy when you go for: safest VPN, best buy and also a mean lean services department. I am a very pleased user, for a long time.

    I am a bit (or maybe even a bit more) disappointed that a long time quality side as Ghacks.net who regularly does roundups about a all kind of programs still has no overview, about VPN services?
    Hopefully a oversight which will be dealt with ferry soon.

  3. Tom Hawack said on September 18, 2021 at 1:58 pm
    Reply

    No VPN here. Should I ever use one it’d be TOR, and system-wide. I dislike browser-specific connection settings, be it even for DNS. So Mozilla DNS is definitely not for me.

    1. ULBoom said on September 18, 2021 at 10:35 pm
      Reply

      Tor entry nodes are fairly widely known by IPS’s. They’ll know you’re using Tor. Use it inside a VPN.

      1. Tor said on September 18, 2021 at 11:26 pm
        Reply
  4. Matti said on September 18, 2021 at 4:15 pm
    Reply

    If Mozilla is using Mullvad’s default blocklists for ad and tracker blocking, then it’s pretty much next to useless, as Mullvad use the very basic EasyList offerings with no support for wildcards. You’re better off depending on dedicated blocking apps or browser based extensions, or at the very least use the custom DNS setting in the Mozilla VPN app to point to a server like AdHole or BlahDNS. As a Mullvad user, their measly blocklists are probably my only complaint.

    1. geremy.jaden said on September 26, 2021 at 5:09 pm
      Reply
  5. GetJiggyWitIT said on September 18, 2021 at 5:58 pm
    Reply

    It is pointless to purchase a VPN with credit card and give your personal information to sign up.
    If you need to change the Country of your IP just for contents on third party services such as Netflix and Amazon then there are even cheaper options for it out there.
    Since CEO of Mozilla openly advocates for censorship and requests more than deplatforming for her political opponents, It look very hypocrital to me to fund them.
    I live in a third world country with censored internet and use VPNs for over a decade now. I will never fund any censorship advocate organization, period.

    Their service provider Mullvad already has a better consept in terms of no private info needed and payment solutions.
    They is no guarantee Mozilla won’t log our data. Stay away from the providers based in US.

    1. Martin P. said on September 19, 2021 at 10:07 pm
      Reply

      @GetJiggyWitIT

      « It is pointless to purchase a VPN with credit card and give your personal information to sign up. »

      Some VPN provider accept Bitcoins for people who want to stay anonymous.

      1. Arbitrary Name said on October 5, 2021 at 5:34 pm
        Reply

        @Martin: Bitcoin payments are rarely private. The only easily achievable privacy is with cash transactions, which Mullvad accepts, and which a lot of governments and big businesses seem bent on stopping. (Hmmm… I wonder why?)

        @GetJiggy: I agree with your point about the hypocrisy of Mozilla’s behaviour. It’s a much, much better option to deal directly with Mullvad. The latter company is either a perfectly conceived government honeypot or is an excellent VPN. At the moment, my money is on the latter! :)

  6. ilev said on September 18, 2021 at 6:44 pm
    Reply

    “Mozilla partnered with Mullvad, a Swedish company”

    Don’t touch it. Sweden is part of 14-Eyes so everything passing in the VPN is decrypted. logged, tracked..

    1. ULBoom said on September 18, 2021 at 10:45 pm
      Reply

      Far as I know, VPN’s are outside those laws in Sweden unless there have been very recent changes. I don’t use VPN’s for anything earth shaking, though.

      I trust Mullvad, not anything that originates in Silicon Valley where pure greed is job one.

      1. ilev said on September 19, 2021 at 8:01 am
        Reply

        “VPN’s are outside those laws in Sweden”

        There is no such laws that exclude VPNs for 14-eyes espionage/surveillance system.
        Everything is tracked..

      2. Yash said on September 19, 2021 at 8:25 am
        Reply

        That is the only doubt about Mullvad, based in 14 eyes, but apart from that it is a very good service with virtually no issues like some other VPNs.

        I agree with “I don’t use VPNs for anything earth shaking, though” written by ULBoom. IMO there are only two real benefits of VPNs – P2P and Geographical unblocking in streaming sites, apart from hiding internet usage from ISP obviously. For top secret documents about Aliens, Tor is the answer.

  7. ULBoom said on September 18, 2021 at 10:46 pm
    Reply

    May be a good idea to use a different Custom DNS…

  8. pd said on September 19, 2021 at 3:07 am
    Reply

    “Join the waitlist”

    LOL

    Mullvad supports my country, Mozilla doesn’t.

    LOL

  9. Iron Heart said on September 19, 2021 at 11:23 am
    Reply

    @Martin Brinkmann

    OT: Manjaro Cinnamon drops Firefox as default browser, switches to Vivaldi. Might be worth a report.

    You may or may not publish this comment, just an info for you.

    1. deWormer said on September 19, 2021 at 7:53 pm
      Reply

      @Martin Brinkmann

      OT: Brave drops the ball. Audio randomizing can be fully bypassed. You should do an article on how useless their fingerprinting is, just more info for you, after the two canvas leaks and other non-protected high entropy metrics

      1. Iron Heart said on September 20, 2021 at 9:01 am
        Reply

        @deWormer

        You know how much Firefox does to protect fingerprinting by default (the way most people use the browser)? LITERALLY NOTHING. It leaks all the real values, not making any effort to protect any of them. FF leaves it totally to the user to fingerprint themselves by randomly changing about:config settings, thus sticking out as a result without having fixed anything.

        Their Canvas protections are known for causing breakage and they do not protect WebGL at all short of disabling it (Brave protects WebGL), with disabling WebGL again causing breakage. Firefox assigns unique extension IDs to each extension per user and those leak as well, negating all other defenses.

        Firefox also has bad security standards (see my reply to @TractorDepot), worse web compatibility, and worse performance, all of which should be factors to discuss before we even approach the “privacy” question. Disgrace of a project, and not anywhere close to Chromium-based browsers in terms of overall quality, and yes, I have used both recently. Deserves its 3% market share as a result of horrid decision making.

      2. Anonymous said on September 21, 2021 at 11:15 am
        Reply

        > You know how much Firefox does to protect fingerprinting by default

        Who cares. If the tools are there, SMART people turn them on. IGNORANT people rant on about defaults.

        Iron Heart’s fingerprinting knowledge is literally a steaming pile of STINKY SHIT. He doesn’t know how entropy, fingerprinting or linkability works

        Here’s a tiny snippet of his lack of knowledge on the subject
        https://www.ghacks.net/2021/07/31/how-firefoxs-new-smartblock-feature-works/#comment-4501396
        https://www.ghacks.net/2021/07/31/how-firefoxs-new-smartblock-feature-works/#comment-4501361

        Iron Heart still doesn’t understand that canvas protection breaks canvas BY DESIGN, and that users can allow site exceptions, which doesn’t compromise your fingerprint. It’s not a compat issue, because you can unbreak it.

        Iron Heart still doesn’t understand that while RFP doesn’t cover webgl fully, yet, neither does Brave with regards to dozens of metrics that combined are just are telling: fonts + screen metrics + languages/locale + formatting + timezone + devicepixelratio combined on their own is enough.

        Iron Heart thinks Brave’s fingerprinting is better than RFP, when in fact RFP at it’s worst can only be the equal of Brave

      3. Iron Heart said on September 21, 2021 at 1:46 pm
        Reply

        > Who cares. If the tools are there, SMART people turn them on. IGNORANT people rant on about defaults.

        Dude, you are the ignorant. First things first, most people use browsers with the defaults. That is just a reality, and not of my making, you fool. NOT to discuss this would be foolish. Secondly, that FF’s anti-FP tools are not turned on by default does affect the effectiveness of RFP for the people who have it turned on, because the crowd they hide is a joke, minuscule.

        > Iron Heart’s fingerprinting knowledge is literally a steaming pile of STINKY SHIT. He doesn’t know how entropy, fingerprinting or linkability works

        …or so you say. What do YOU know? Your original argument was already a failure, that only a small number of people having RFP on supposedly doesn’t affect its effectiveness, when fingerprinting clearly relies on people not being easily distinguishable.

        > Iron Heart still doesn’t understand that canvas protection breaks canvas BY DESIGN

        That’s not the point. The breakage is a web compat issue no matter the intention.

        > and that users can allow site exceptions, which doesn’t compromise your fingerprint.

        Site exception = real Canvas data leaks on the website = affects your fingerprint.

        > It’s not a compat issue, because you can unbreak it.

        It’s clearly a web compat issue if the goal is Canvas being protected. If you don’t care about Canvas protections, it isn’t one.

        > Iron Heart still doesn’t understand that while RFP doesn’t cover webgl fully

        FF doesn’t cover WebGL at all short of completely disabling it, which is not a valid solution.

        > Iron Heart thinks Brave’s fingerprinting is better than RFP

        Oh yeah? Really? Perhaps you should start by admitting that RFP can’t defend against advanced scripts either because the people fiddling with their FF settings are all unique.

        > when in fact RFP at it’s worst can only be the equal of Brave

        It can’t do shit against advanced scripts, there is no use case for this outside of the unified setup of Tor. Fiddling with the FF settings yourself is not a solution, you’ll be as unique as before.

        Terminate your project now, you know which. It only exists for your self-gratification.

  10. Henk said on September 19, 2021 at 12:49 pm
    Reply

    Every few years, when my VPN subscription ends, I shop around for a new one: looking at the latest comparison tests to weigh factors such as safety, speed, streaming effectivity, number of servers to choose from, UI ease, and value-for-money. This means that by now I’ve been using several very different VPNs, including some of the big ones (PIA, Nord).

    I will readily admit that the ideal VPN (all factors optimal) simply does not exist. So which one you choose, will depend from what at any given moment you feel are important considerations. At the moment, like one of the commenters above, I’m using Surfshark. Clearly, anyone can have her personal reasons to prefer another one.

    And BTW, obviously there also is something to say by itself for the principle of switching VPN provider every few years, instead of using the same one for most of your life.

  11. DON'T USE said on September 19, 2021 at 1:40 pm
    Reply

    Firefox => Mullvad => Säpo!

  12. Anonymous said on September 20, 2021 at 4:13 pm
    Reply

    First, Mozilla VPN is a purposefully misleading name, it’s just Mozilla doing paid advertising for some third-party VPN. And if the purpose was the be paid to apply their “trust stamp” on that third-party product (which by itself is already an interestingly unethical practice no matter how trustworthy that product is), it’s sad there are still people trusting Mozilla as a recommendation source after all the paid malware/malservice recommendations they did and still do, in addition of course to the malware/malservices they deliver themselves. I would have more trust in the product if Mozilla had not touched it at all, Mozilla’s involvement is only rising the suspicion.

    Notice the bitchy subliminal message from Mozilla: tracking domains are described as “harmful” only with the purpose of implicitly asserting that ad domains are not harmful according to them. Thanks Google for the cash.

    Finally that window does not seem to say who the alternative DNS provider is. Mozilla letting smelly businesses like Cloudflare spy on Firefox users’ DNS queries by default by having the browser send them a duplicate of that information (in addition to the ISP still being able to infer it most of the time) is not the least of their offenses against privacy, and this should give anyone one more reason to pause and think when Mozilla is talking about hijacking again one’s DNS provider.

    However in case the queries go through the VPN it may not be the main problem. This leads us to the second issue, censorship by Mozilla approved DNS providers. When starting their DNS provider hijacking campaign, Mozilla promised that the new providers would not censor or they would be excluded from their list. It turns out that once again they had lied. Then the betrayal started and they started saying that the alternative providers will be allowed to censor as long as they give the list of what they censor. Then they changed their mind again about that and said that they would no longer be forced to disclose the list of what they censor to be their partners. The end result is that Mozilla may hijack your DNS provider to another one which may possibly censor sites that were not censored before the hijacking. One more reason to ask who are the unnamed alternative DNS that Mozilla recommends switching to.

    1. Lith said on September 22, 2021 at 7:30 am
      Reply

      You’re reading too much into DNS options. That Custom DNS window doesn’t not say who the alternative DNS provider is because it’s literally empty by default. The user has to input the resolver’s IP address – either your own (eg: PiHole, DNSCrypt, etc) or an external service of your choice. The other options just use Mullvad’s own DoH servers (very basic blocking only, depending on EasyList). The Mozilla app is literally a reskinned Mullvad app.

  13. jan said on September 21, 2021 at 9:15 pm
    Reply

    What a firework!! What an amount of energy expended for nothing as there is no progress in any direction. How pissed primitive minds can be.

    I am sooo glad that am so much higher and far above that level.
    Now you all can go after me and my arrogance
    Good luck
    Jan

  14. Chris said on September 24, 2021 at 11:15 pm
    Reply

    Martin What is the privacy-friendly DNS server that you can suggest

    1. Martin Brinkmann said on September 25, 2021 at 6:29 am
      Reply

      You could check out Quad9.

  15. Peter Newton said on September 27, 2021 at 9:36 pm
    Reply

    Wouldn’t it be nice if politicians slugged it out like this, in a dark room deep underground, with no electricity, where you wouldn’t be able to hear them, and they just left the rest of us alone to get on with our peaceful lives.

    LOL

    Round No ? oh well …. ding ding lets get ready to rumble ! …. oh wait ! perhaps we could televise this and promote it as a new national sport !

  16. zelda said on October 1, 2021 at 12:05 am
    Reply

    Mozilla claims to protect user’s privacy, but they hide, protect and force the spyware host “firefox.settings.services.mozilla.com” on its 9x-esr official releases, fooling all of its users.

    If you don’t believe me, run Wireshark on the DNS port and disable all connections. You still can disable all of the other auto-connections, but that cited one will stay forever!

  17. Firefox For said on October 7, 2021 at 10:51 pm
    Reply

    Martin Is arkenfox enough for firefox configuration?

    1. Iron Heart said on October 12, 2021 at 12:26 pm
      Reply

      At this point, do yourself a favor and use Tor, not some half-assed user.js trying to copy Tor.

      1. Firefox For said on October 12, 2021 at 2:37 pm
        Reply

        tor is already a copy of firefox no browser can beat firefox with containers

      2. Iron Heart said on October 15, 2021 at 8:12 am
        Reply

        @Firefox For

        Tor is *based on* Firefox, not *copied from* Firefox. There are some things Tor can do which Firefox can’t. If you think Firefox + containers (lol) beats Tor, you are delusional.

      3. Firefox For said on October 17, 2021 at 4:38 pm
        Reply

        The same-based browsers work for the development of main browsers
        This article would be more useful to you
        https://www.privacytools.io/#browser

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.