My ISP's router has isolation. Has had for 5+ years. Main SSID has it off so we can do LAN stuff. Guest SSID is used for IoT things and isolation turned off. Handy.
What exactly does it isolate? An SSID? IP addresses? individual MAC addresses? How does this stop a pre-infected device you purchased from shitting traffic out of your network, acting as a residential proxy or try to own your other IoT devices?
The one I've seen on ~basic consumer routers just disallows wifi devices from talking to each other at all, it won't route between them. I usually need something more nuanced personally, but it's not a bad start at all.
Adding to this... Spinrite can re-write the bits so their charge doesn't diminish over time. There's a relevant Security Now and GRC article for those curious.
Re-writing data from the host system is quite wasteful of a drive's write endurance. It probably shouldn't be done more often than once a year. Reading the data and letting the drive decide if it needs to be rewritten should be done more often.
They accepted payment to get around quotas (and probably ran ads). Even if it was a tiny percentage of people who engaged with them this way, or even if they profited at all, they took money in exchange for accessing an illicit resource. That is likely the main reason the teeth have come out to bite.
If anything though this might push that resource to the hands of people who can maintaining the massive library voluntarily and distributed with less ethical/morally-dubious implications.
What would you define as "Brave's 'bad stuff'" ? It would seem that Brave does a lot to leave power of choice while erroring on safety / privacy for the defaults. What issues does it have?
For now it let's you keep the BAT stuff and ads off, but the incentives are not totally aligned there and I'd worry in the future they might force you to use it.
Ultimately they're inserting themselves in as the attention reseller - it's still an engagement/ad play dressed up a bit.
I really like what they've built, but I don't like how they're trying to monetize it. I think the ad/attention model is a corrupting influence on content quality generally, I can see what they're trying to do but I'd rather ad supported models just die. A browser completely focused on the user would just block ads and be done with it (imo).
Just let me pay for software that doesn't suck so our incentives are aligned. If you want a free ad-supported version for people unwilling to pay then fine.
reply