171–180 of 219 posts
It's a little unclear to me - does Brave prevent it or not? Edit: some interesting background on what they do here: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Fingerprinting-P...
https://privacytests.org Maintained by a Brave employee, though the site is fully open in all senses of the word, as far as I'm aware.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what plugins do you use/recommend?
You could try these: Browser Plugs Fingerprint Privacy Randomizer Clear URLs [I don't care about cockies] Privacy Badger Random User-Agent Switcher Temporary Containers uBlock Origin Canvas Blocker NoScript Font Fingerprint Defender Not all sites will work with it. For banking and plan ticket booking, I always recommend a separate, but major (e.g. Chrome) browser without any plug-ins.
Don't bother. User agent spoofing is easily detectable and it's trivial to figure out your real user-agent based on js implementation differences or TLS fingerprinting. All this does is get you banned/flagged by security vendors, on top of sticking out like a sore thumb.
>Canvas Blocker
>Font Fingerprint Defender
Also easy to easy to detect because randomized values will put you in the bucket of "uses privacy extension" users, which is probably a smaller bucket than whatever hardware profile you're on (eg. macbook pro m3 14").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is the downside Just of the top of my head: - Timezone is set to UTC which means any web calendar input becomes confusing at best - Canvases turn into random stripes, which leaves artefacts all over many websites - Some websites outright block you as bots (twitch does this) - Some web APIs break, which can be a pain if you're web apps that rely on them You can add websites to a whitelist to avoid the downsides…
other downsides, cloudflare, PayPal and all kinds of finance related sites will assign high threat level for you and you will make your life miserable for causes ranging from captcha through rejecting your purchases to even blocking you access. and the worst part is that this didn't changed the fingerprint generated by mentioned here site just increases suspect level to 9
???
It definitely does. Are you talking about how it doesn't change between subsequent visits?
I'm considering it a good thing at this point that I'm getting captcha-walled with increasing frequency. It means that my setup and behavior looks more like the billions of anonymous bots flooding the web rather than a lucrative mark.
You should share details on your setup.
Browser fingerprinting is one of those things that should be outright illegal - it is far more of a threat than tracking cookies ever were. But it hasn't permeated the public consciousness like cookies have, so regulators seem to ignore it.
It's a little unclear to me - does Brave prevent it or not? Edit: some interesting background on what they do here: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Fingerprinting-P...
Does it matter? Brave is adware, so even if they prevent fingerprinting, you're just trading one vendor for another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44169115 They found sneaky ways on Android. There is no way they aren't trying to do so on iOS. One must always assume malice with anything Meta.
I find it is useful to do so for all corporations.
Meta and Google make their money primarily from advertisers, Apple makes money from consumers buying iPhones. One of the upsides to paying for something is that the company is incentivized to keep you paying or get you to pay more.
Something I remind people who buy cheaper Android phones and then complain about ads - the OS development is being subsidized by those ads. From Google’s perspective, securing their revenue stream is the justification for Chrome and Android’s existence. It’s not a purely altruistic move to fund their open source development.
Charts of the revenue stream for some major tech companies:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-how-does-meta-make-...
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/alphabets-revenue-breakdown...
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-how-apple-makes-its...
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-amazon-makes-its-billio...
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-microsoft-makes-its-bil...
Older aggregate chart:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-big-tech-makes-their-bi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what plugins do you use/recommend?
You could try these: Browser Plugs Fingerprint Privacy Randomizer Clear URLs [I don't care about cockies] Privacy Badger Random User-Agent Switcher Temporary Containers uBlock Origin Canvas Blocker NoScript Font Fingerprint Defender Not all sites will work with it. For banking and plan ticket booking, I always recommend a separate, but major (e.g. Chrome) browser without any plug-ins.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see this as an argument for avoiding unusual properties, but how can they identify you using random properties? Even if it is just one user doing this how can they match the fingerprints? Also, its unusual enough that its unlikely they will bother trying.
The fact that the properties are randomized (and which properties are randomized) identifies the extension that you’re using, and if that extension has like 10 users, that uniquely identifies you across sites. All of this is overkill anyway unless you actually think you’re up against a determined actor targeting you personally. If you are, they will bother trying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can't be made entirely illegal so IMO a better way would be to remove or restrict the APIs that fingerprinting scripts abuse. Make browsers hypertext viewers again!
Why can't it be made illegal? And from the article, a very succinct explanation as to why browsers will never be fingerprint-resilient: > Chromium (Chrome) is built by Google, an advertisement company which tracks its users for showing relevant ads. So naturally it doesn’t have any inbuilt protection against fingerprinting.
You could compare it to the concept of security by obscurity which is obviously bad.