User2288 Vanadium will appear the same as any other Vanadium on the same device model, and we don't support a lot of device models. The screen resolution and performance of the device (both CPU and GPU) are essentially enough to identify the device on their own. Main language, time zone and your IP / DNS resolver are the main differentiation between users. If you change site-facing settings, that makes you stand out more. There is not really anything that Vanadium can do beyond completing state partitioning (in progress) and providing a way to set a standard language (US English) and time zone (perhaps UTC) as an override. Trying to hide other ways of differentiating between device models via GPU will amount to almost nothing. With a lot of changes, perhaps certain device models we support could appear the same to websites in most ways, but we don't support a lot of device models anyway. It can be easily detected which browser is used based on how it behaves. The more we change, the easier that is to detect. This is why a very niche, barely used browser trying to do anti-fingerprinting features ultimately doesn't work. Nothing can compare to the userbase of a browser like Chrome or Safari. Anti-fingerprinting works best in an enormously widely used browser. Getting rid of ways to detect device model only helps if it's used across many device models. Unless we normalize screen resolution somehow, there is no point.

      TommyTran732 Brave's resistance is only enough to fool naive scripts - more sophisticated ones like https://fingerprint.com/ can fingerprint it as usual.

      Just posting to adress this point in particular. I'm not sure this is a good example of the limitations of Brave's fingerprinting resistance. See the discussion here: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/20268. If I understood correctly, it seems that fingerprint.com's demo isn't actually very sophisticated and while it may look impressive, it is probably not very precise in practice. Or at least that was the case some time ago.

      I'm not saying Brave's anti-fingerprinting is flawless either.

        The major problem facing an unsophisticated user, such as I, is our inability to distinguish BS from “real” information.

        We therefore have to rely on the folks who have deep and firsthand knowledge of the project, and regard all others with suspicion.

          Good discussion here ...

          to use a PWA I can't use incognito mode, or it forgets log in/2fa, etc...

          But PWA is still a webpage, utilizing all the web tracking tools (ie. Tracking pixels, etc). That don't get cleared on exit

          So any other site visited in the same browser can following those pixels tracking my usage/tastes outside the PWA

          So it seems I'd need a dedicated browser only for PWA apps .. OK, that's fine. But if Brave is able to lock down further than Vanadium it sounds better for quick non-followed searches, and Vanadium is the default browser for opening links, its extra security is needed there, but in incognito mode...

          So I need to install a third browser just for PWA (and the increase in attack surface that comes with that) ... I'm looking for a better option.

          If there a way to have multiple installs of Brave (with different settings, not sharing cookies, tracking pixels, etc..). On a single profile?

          Currently I have to use a second profile to accomplish this

            matchboxbananasynergy

            Interesting, I'll have to keep an eye out for this .. .

            When I think of cloning, they would still share states though? . . . ie: shared cache/storage/install parameters .. so a tracking pixel set on one, would be inherited to the other

            Guess we won't know until it's released and we can test the implimentation.

                Graph_Curious No. To my understanding, they'll be distinct. For example, you'll be able to log into one account on one instance of the app, and to another account on the other instance of the app. It doesn't just apply to browser apps, but all apps.

                    • [deleted]

                    • Post #19

                    GrapheneOS Hi, we had this discussion last night on twitter and indeed it is a complicated subject. But on GrapheneOS, the best solution to navigate while being blended in the biggest mass would be to use Google chrome? Would using it on GrapheneOS make it unique or is it better to stay on vanadium? What is the best solution to be invisible? (A bit to close the topic once and for all)

                      I think anyone who thinks that they can truly “be invisible” is chasing fairies in the moonlight, but that’s just my opinion.

                        • [deleted]

                        • Post #23
                        • Edited

                        OpenSource-Ghost Yes, but we can't count on the digital fingerprinting of a completely modified chomium browser... That's either chomium or vanadium in my question. Plus brave includes a von and crypto stuff so not good

                            • [deleted]

                            • Post #24

                            And brave is not in version 112 at the moment

                            Does anyone know whether it is possible to install Vanadium on a non-GrapheneOS system? Or is there a decent fork of it?

                              [deleted]

                              Brave is the most modified because of all the crypto revenue stuff. Bromite is basically hardened and tweaked Ungoogled Chromium + ad-blocking + anti-fingerprinting. I'd stick with Vanadium if security is more important to you than anti-fingerprinting features and anti-ad features. Otherwise I'd use Uazo's builds of Bromite. I don't like Brave.

                                  OpenSource-Ghost
                                  I don't like Brave all that much either but it has in my mind at least one killer feature that Vanadium hasn't. The option to delete all content (history, cookies, etc.) when you close the app.

                                  I really wish Vanadium had that feature.

                                    • [deleted]

                                    • Post #29
                                    • Edited

                                    I don't even know why bromite is mentioned, it is only in version 108! This is a joke

                                      They have been lagging behind since last December.