It's nice that they are changing their marketing on this a bit now that there is a wave to ride and the evils of DRM are coming for them; but, let's not forgot that, at the end of the day, <i>Brave is just another company that makes money on ads</i> :(, and (thereby) has most of the same anti-user incentives.<p>So, sure... they clearly don't want to be prevented from blocking <i>other peoples' ads</i> (a big part of their pitch); but, blocking <i>their ads</i> while still getting paid--which is, of course, extremely easy to pull off on an unrestricted computer--is an existential threat to their only actual revenue stream which they want to protect against.<p>The ramification: Brave's product managers--and even Brendan Eich himself (whom all of the later quotes I have in this comment were taken from, directly or indirectly)--have often talked about using the very same remote attestation technology to protect their SDK and even their browser for the same reasons as Google.<p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/bw6sek/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/bw6sek/</a><p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/b7rwbx/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/b7rwbx/</a><p>> 1/ native C++/Rust code, no JS tags on page that have zero integrity. That means ability to use SGX/TrustZone to check integrity and develop private user score from all sensor inputs in the enclave; ...<p>> We already have to deal w/ fraud. That is inherent in any system with users and revenue shares or grants. We do it better via C++ and (under way) SGX or TrustZone integrity checking + OS sensor APIs, vs today’s antifraud scripts that are routinely fooled.<p>> What Brave offers that's far better than today's joke of an antifraud system for ads is as follows: 1/ integrity-checked open source native code, which cannot be fooled by other JS on page; ... (1) requires SGX or ARM equivalent, widespread on mobile.<p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/</a><p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/97trex/comment/e4axu6h/?context=1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/97trex/comment/...</a><p>> Part of the roadmap (details in update) is a BAT SDK. Obviously it would be open source, but more: we would require Secure Remote Attestation (Intel SGX broken but ARM TrustZone as used by Trustonic may be ok) to prove integrity of the SDK code in app.