The only thing that makes sense of the post is saying how the default should be Aggressive, but it will break many sites like today (reason why they are changing how Standard works) so it would be better if it was asked on the start wizard what people want with cons and pros about the modes.īrave before aggressive mode was in place, they said they wanted to allow 1p stuff anyway, and they whitelisted many 1p stuff in the Brave unbreak adblock list, which you can easily see when you have uBlock installed and you go to duckduckgo, Brave allows analytics. The person is even using Stable Brave, and that’s because Standard in Nightly doesn’t block any google script because they are obviously all 1p stuff, so the person is not even using Nightly to even understand the situation and Standard will obviously allow 1p ads since it is not applying cosmetic filters. That was the ONLY difference between aggressive and standard mode, now they are making the distinction about both modes, now Standard will properly allow 1p stuff and properly block 3p scripts and stuff like that and aggressive will be able to block both. Now You: do you use a browser with content blocking functionality? Did you run into site compatibility issues because of it or content blocking post doesn’t make sense since usually those ads are cosmetic filters and Standard mode was made to exactly that, don’t apply cosmetics to 1p stuff and only 3p ads. Users who want to retain the default blocking level need to switch it to aggressive in order to retain it. The change to the standard blocking level allows first-party subrequests that were blocked previously because of the included filter lists. There is a fine line between protection settings and ensuring that sites load and function properly.
Brave published a table that highlights the blocking behavior and differences between the browser's standard and aggressive blocking modes: Standard (default)
0 kommentar(er)
