• Rooki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The “Privacy Statement” of Brave Search is somewhat weird tbh. Not clear, Obfuscated.

          • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Edit: My comment below was based on a faulty understanding of how EDDM mailers worked and a faulty assumption I based on that ignorance. What they did in reality is little more than sending out spam mail, it was not a privacy violation.

            Purely from a privacy standpoint, however, there has never been an indication they have violated users’ trust in that regard.

            That’s simply not true though.

            They have sent out direct mailers that basically equated to a customer list leak.

            In regards to the mailers, they messed up and passed blame,

            In this process, our EDDM vendor made a significant mistake by not excluding names, but instead including names before addresses, resulting in the distribution of personalized mailers.

            I hope you consider a customer list leak to be a breach of privacy. And seeing how they didn’t take responsibility but tried to pass blame, they didn’t take such a mistake very seriously or respond in a manner that instills further trust.

              • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think you may be right actually. When I read this

                In this process, our EDDM vendor made a significant mistake by not excluding names, but instead including names before addresses, resulting in the distribution of personalized mailers.

                from their statement, I made an assumption because I didn’t look at how EDDM works. The way I read “not excluding names, but instead including names” was: We sent a list of names to the vendor; the vendor was supposed to exclude those names, and mail to everyone else in the ZIP, but instead, they mailed to only those names. It seems that’s not an accurate understanding of the situation. I think the correct reading is: we said “no names” on our EDDM mailers but they acted as if we said “yes names” on our EDDM mailers.

                From my original interpretation, that is essentially a customer list leak, or at least a ‘localized’ customer list leak, especially for anyone in a shared living environment where someone else may see the name printed on a Brave mailer and learn that that person is a Brave user.

                Thanks for clearing it up though. Let me try to go back and edit a few previous comments where I’ve said this to clarify.