True, and the reverse is also true when a product is bad. I blog usually about what I'm interested in testing out, and when I see if may be worth me moving to a different service.
RCS is carrier based though, which is why the carriers had to buy into it, and they turn it on, not Google. Many in 3rd World countries don't have e-mail. Many legal notices are today still sent out by text SMS. I get them all the time for bank transactions, government notices, etc. Actually, Samsung's Message app also supports RCS, and this is what Apple is building into their Apple Messages app too.
They do accept Tor connections though... But I think you have the facts wrong about that access to data unless you have a credible source you can share: They are legally obligated to comply with lawful requests from Swiss authorities if they meet specific criteria (just like every other country except the USA where law enforcement [used?] could just request access. In a US case involving threats against immunologist Anthony Fauci, ProtonMail confirmed they received a legal request from Swiss authorities. However, due to end-to-end encryption, they could only provide the date the account was created, not the content of emails.
Just like the Bitwarden app on Android, the Proton Pass one sits in the background to help with auto-fill on any browser form, irrespective of which browser it is.
It will be when SMS s phased out. That was why it has been a long, uphill battle to get the mobile phone providers to buy in. That has to happen before SMS can disappear. That is why no other "messenger/chat apps" need mobile provider buy-in. RCS happens at carrier level, and not as an installable 3rd party app. It's exactly why it will be adopted by everyone as it is designed to replace SMS.
The whole point of RCS was to replace text SMS. The last year or two has seen one mobile provider after the next adopting it. That was the point of RCS, to get beyond a zero encryption text message and text messages that are very expensive in 3rd world countries. So a lot of it was focussed on mobile operators. It has to be enabled actually by mobile operators to work.
True and Matrix is very versatile if you look at what Beeper achieved. Yet it has been around a long time and has never gone big time. The thing though with replacing text SMS, is it has to also comply with what the mobile phone companies use at that level, and I don't Matrix has ever pitched that to them? This is not about the high level messaging we do at app level.
A problem I've noticed is I've had one person using RCS, then a month or two later I noticed they'd reverted to text. They seemed to know nothing about RCS and claims they never disabled it. So not sure if that was maybe a phone upgrade. Others I've not had issues with.
Probably best to see their comparison but free account mainly excludes Integrated 2FA authenticator and only has two vaults, but unlimited logins. I'm on the unlimited account (for VPN and mail) so can't check for sure.
341 Mbps down, 144 Mbps up at about $65pm in South Africa (advertised 300/150).
My worry is many of those posts are assumptions being made without any evidence at all of anything actually happening - yes someone can be a chairman of two companies, but does he have the means to exchange data between the two, are the two companies in fact passing any information, and has this actually been observed? Thiel is a known investor who invests for profit. Yes he is also a board member of Facebook (who we know we cannot trust as we know about Cambridge Analytics and similar issues, as well as the WhatsApp privacy policy issues - all widely reported with evidence), but again we can't just assume now that Brave data is in fact being passed to Facebook - it is not mentioned for example in the privacy policy like it was in WhatsApp's privacy policy. I like to see some evidence of something happening, otherwise everything ends up being linked to everything else without any basis. Google pays Firefox to have their search engine as a default, but does that mean Firefox is passing private data back to Google? We don't know for sure, but if we don't yet have evidence about it, should we automatically now condemn Firefox by association?
Other issues like the link redirect did actually happen, but have been fixed - https://www.zdnet.com/article/privacy-browser-brave-busted-for-autocompleting-urls-to-versions-it-profits-from/. So it happened, but is no longer the case. Yes it casts some doubt, but every company has to ethically make their money somehow otherwise they don't exist. They should not make it that way, though, and hopefully they learnt their lesson
Then we see studies like this at https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2020/02/27/brave-beats-other-browsers-in-privacy-study/ which puts Brave first in terms of the least privacy data that leaks back "home" out of a number of browsers.
In my mind, I then come back to: Do I give more weight to a study or to a few posts that speculate some connections? I'm not saying either that I now pronounce Brave to be 100% secure and private: But I'm not seeing evidence to the contrary.
Firefox has been too slow for me, and although I really liked Vivaldi, I was not happy with their business model about keeping their improvements as closed source (in case someone else used it, they say). One could also speculate there - are they hiding something in there, but we don't know because it's closed.
danie10
joined 3 years ago
Not really, right now as the password resets all undermine passkeys for many sites. One day if/when passwords get replaced then there will be a need, but that is a long way off probably. A good random password along with any 2FA is really good enough for most cases, and Bitwarden already does that very well along with even random e-mail addresses.