Brave vs Samsung
Based on our analysis, Brave is the more privacy-respecting choice overall.
BACK →| Category | Brave | Samsung |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | A · 86/100 | D · 39/100 |
| What they collect | Positive (88) | Concern (25) |
| Who they share it with | Positive (85) | Concern (32) |
| What you can do | Positive (84) | Mixed (50) |
| What they promise | Positive (83) | Mixed (45) |
Brave's browser collects no browsing history and routes most sensitive requests through its own proxies to strip your IP address — the privacy architecture is genuinely sophisticated — but it's a US company, Safe Browsing on mobile exposes your IP to Google or Apple, and Leo AI feedback submissions can include full conversation transcripts retained for a year.
View full analysis →Samsung's data appetite is unusually broad for a hardware maker: voice recordings stored on servers with potential third-party retention, keyboard input logging via Predictive Text synced across devices, and persistent hardware identifiers that survive ad-ID resets. The company explicitly acknowledges that sharing with business partners may constitute a data sale under US law (CCPA). Full GDPR-grade rights are reserved for EEA/UK/Swiss residents; everyone else gets basic access and deletion with no response-time commitments. Retention timelines are vague and there are no named security certifications or breach notification windows.
View full analysis →