Have you read the about page on privacytests.org? How is it a Brave ad (and not a Mullvad or Librewolf ad) when it is not even the best ranked?

Let me cite what I wrote above once again, please read it: "Note: Each test is counted with a value of one in this chart, however each test may not have an equal importance in regard to privacy. It still gives an image of which browsers value privacy and which do not."

I am the OP of this and I do not use Brave and would never touch it because of the scummy crap they have done. But this is NOT what this graph is showing. The website linked is certainly legit.

Thank you. I think you are right, both on me being frustrated and also the weakness of the presentation. I appreciate the comment.

The tables in the source shows why.

There are many things measured in those tables around preventing URL tracking, cookies, and storing data in session storage etc which none of the mainstream browsers are doing, including Firefox.

Some of them are decisions made for good reason, because although preventing them would improve privacy it would also massively impact usability, and so only the most all-in privacy-focused browsers are doing that.

OP themselves notes that they have weighted each 'check' as a 1 and each 'cross' as a 0 in calculating the size of the bars in the chart, without consideration of how relatively important or not those features are against other.

Personally I believe the approach to generating the chart is flawed and does not give a fair measure of browser privacy.

Tor too, that's even more surprising.

Firefox tries to keep its defaults on the 'functional' side of safe. Firefox will pass almost every test on here by changing some settings away from default to more strict (like the enhanced privacy tracking), but doing so can actually break some websites. That said, this is a brave ad. A big tip off for me is GCP. Its development was supported by the Mozilla foundation but Firefox gets a 'fail' here because it isn't on by default. No test that expects a user to know what all these things are could also reasonably expect a user to not check if they're enabled. A fair test would have been to rate all these browsers with their defaults AND hardened (without plugins). Keep in mind Brave doesn't give you the choice to disable GCP, they dictate what you can and cannot do in this regard, so it isn't possible to A/B test Brave's behavior in a lot of these cases.

How is Firefox that high?

How? Firefox 121 has that score because it "failed" on 86 of the 143 tests, you can see which tests if you go to the source.

As someone already commented, Firefox actually lets a bunch of things through and has telemetry. But it can be hardened and it is (IMO) the best browser all-in-all.

But it is not perfect.

Please note (AGAIN) that 1 test (1 point) here is NOT equal to all other tests. But I have no way to weigh one test against another, there are 143 tests (points) to consider. I thought it was obvious but for some reason people chose not to read the description, or misunderstood it. Sorry if it wasn't clear enough.

Because stock FF is full of telemetry and tracking.

(Librewolf and Mullvad have the best scores because they are just FF without all the garbage)

Here's how interacted with this post:

• Title told me that "lower is better". Assumption: it's introducing the graph, I should look at it
• Graph shows from left to right the best browsers for privacy. Assumption: they are the best for privacy, the title told me so

Then I read the description. But I'm a data analyst, I'm used to look at the details. Most people do not. They want quick "tell me what's happening". It's something you accept if you work in this field, the best DAs can tell their stories in just a few graphs.

Tip: assume that people won't read anything. They will just look at the graph. If each point is not equal, then your graph needs to show it. Looking at the source really quick, I maybe would've done a graph that shows points per category. It would need some work to look good and not cluttered, but that way you can let the viewer decide for themselves what they consider important and look at the points that matter to them.

Take this as constructive criticism and not as a "gotcha", I fall for this trap every once in a while too. Try to not be frustrated, it's just how it is. Next time you'll do a better job at passing your message

If one point is not equal to another, why count the number of points? Why make a graph if not to show data in a meaningful way?