Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 411 posts

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#61

Post by realusername »

Despegar wrote: post #5
stuff4ben wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it may cause some websites to break and they're aiming to provide a good user-experience for the majority of the population. If they turn this on by default without users knowing the risks of sites not working correctly, they'll unfairly blame Firefox, bad mouth it, and switch to Chrome/Edge/Safari/etc.

That's the stated reason but it's pretty weak to me. Safari hasn't had to make similar compromises.

Because there's no user choice possible on iOS, if you don't like Safari, you just have the choice of another Safari-skinned browser doing exactly the same as the original.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#63

Post by messe »

samirm wrote: post #56
xvector wrote: post #15

Can someone paste their results (or at least bits of fingerprinting entropy) from https://panopticlick.eff.org with the latest Firefox? With the fancy new anti-fingerprinting Safari on macOS Mojave I get just over 14.5 bits of entropy with the most entropic source being my canvas fingerprint (1 in 600). With Safari on iOS I get 11.71 bits of entropy, with the most entropic value being my screen size and color depth.

> 9.93 bits of identifying information. with this new setting turned on + uBlock Origin + NoScript

If you haven't already, change your user agent to get it down further.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#64

Post by [deleted] »

banachtarski wrote: post #53

Serious question. Suppose we have this. I suppose my expectation is that instead of seeing the same ad over and over again, now I'm seeing effectively a random one. Why is this necessarily better? I guess personally, I've always thought that regulating the content of the ads, rather than the usage of sufficiently anonymized data for ad targeting.

[deleted]

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#65

Post by mintplant »

Despegar wrote: post #5
stuff4ben wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it may cause some websites to break and they're aiming to provide a good user-experience for the majority of the population. If they turn this on by default without users knowing the risks of sites not working correctly, they'll unfairly blame Firefox, bad mouth it, and switch to Chrome/Edge/Safari/etc.

That's the stated reason but it's pretty weak to me. Safari hasn't had to make similar compromises.

No, this really is the reason. Anti-fraud systems embedded in checkout pages use fingerprinting, for example, and break if blocked. Site breakage very quickly drives users to other browsers.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#66

Post by Perceptes »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #46
xvector wrote: post #15

Can someone paste their results (or at least bits of fingerprinting entropy) from https://panopticlick.eff.org with the latest Firefox? With the fancy new anti-fingerprinting Safari on macOS Mojave I get just over 14.5 bits of entropy with the most entropic source being my canvas fingerprint (1 in 600). With Safari on iOS I get 11.71 bits of entropy, with the most entropic value being my screen size and color depth.

17.62 bits on firefox, 11.0 on Tor, 17.63 on chrome. On firefox, the big contributors are HTTP headers (my native language is announced), hash of WebGl fingerprint and time zone. On Tor big contributors are hash of webGL fingerprint, screen size. On chrome, they are system fonts, hash of canvas fingerprint, user agent, and time zone. I am not too concerned about the fingerprinting in firefox since I have strict block…

Similar results for me. Does anyone know if it's possible to turn off WebGL, and if so, how? AFAIK I never use it for anything and I'd rather have increased anonymity. (Assuming disabling it prevents it from being used for fingerprinting.)

Edit: Answering my own question. In `about:config`, change the `webgl.disabled` preference from `false` to `true`. This reduced the "bits of identifying information" from WebGL from 11.26 to 2.56.

Edit 2: Apparently the CanvasBlocker add-on is a better solution as it randomizes the data used for fingerprinting on each read, and works for several exploitable APIs, not just WebGL. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/canvasblocker...

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#67

Post by danShumway »

user17843 wrote: post #44
xvector wrote: post #15

Can someone paste their results (or at least bits of fingerprinting entropy) from https://panopticlick.eff.org with the latest Firefox? With the fancy new anti-fingerprinting Safari on macOS Mojave I get just over 14.5 bits of entropy with the most entropic source being my canvas fingerprint (1 in 600). With Safari on iOS I get 11.71 bits of entropy, with the most entropic value being my screen size and color depth.

Firefox Fingerprinting protection has nothing to do with real fingerprinting protection, and does not afffect panopticlick results in any way. It just bloocks a couple of known scripts based on the disconnect list. Of course they don't tell us in their marketing posts.

Firefox deploys two different forms of fingerprint protection:

1) blocking known fingerprinting scripts.

2) blocking underlying techniques.

The second is the one people here are talking about, and it can be enabled by going to your settings and turning on resistFingerprinting. Keep in mind it will do things like normalize your time zone and decrease timer precision.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#68

Post by Kiro »

ziddoap wrote: post #34

I find it really interesting that when a company is making moves in a direction that benefits privacy of consumers, everyone takes the opportunity to shit on them for past mistakes or how it isn't good enough or why isn't it on by default or any other thing they can find to shit on. Yes, every single company has made mistakes. FireFox is no exception. Some of them were pretty egregious. Mistakes are - hopefully - an…

Pretty sure you would never say the same thing about Google.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#69

Post by ouid »

xvector wrote: post #15

Can someone paste their results (or at least bits of fingerprinting entropy) from https://panopticlick.eff.org with the latest Firefox? With the fancy new anti-fingerprinting Safari on macOS Mojave I get just over 14.5 bits of entropy with the most entropic source being my canvas fingerprint (1 in 600). With Safari on iOS I get 11.71 bits of entropy, with the most entropic value being my screen size and color depth.

I think it's funny that panopticlick gives me a little red X for not allowing trackers from companies that have "promised" not to track me. I have no incentive to do so, as I do not get any sort of compensation if they are found to be in violation of those terms.

Re: Block Fingerprinting with Firefox

#70

Post by ziddoap »

Kiro wrote: post #68
ziddoap wrote: post #34

I find it really interesting that when a company is making moves in a direction that benefits privacy of consumers, everyone takes the opportunity to shit on them for past mistakes or how it isn't good enough or why isn't it on by default or any other thing they can find to shit on. Yes, every single company has made mistakes. FireFox is no exception. Some of them were pretty egregious. Mistakes are - hopefully - an…

Pretty sure you would never say the same thing about Google.

What are you basing this assumption on?

The funny thing is, no matter how I reply to your comment I lose by default. If I say I have - you say I'm lying. If I say I haven't, your point is proven. What option do I have?

Perhaps you'd like to chime in on the discussion at hand rather than speculating on my personal life.

Post reply on HN