Trackers which collect metadata about you don't bother with cookies or using your IP anymore. they identify you with a fingerprint of your browser.Modern browsers have tons of javascript APIs that inadvertently expose information about your system, like which GPU you use, or how many CPU cores you have.You will thin k that most of this information seems useless or unreliable. But if you combine all the info, and leave some room for dynamic changes (think Levenshtein distance), it's enough to identify you.You can't stop this with VPNs. You may use privacy addons or privacy aware browsers, but it's completely unclear whether it helps or whether it makes it worse. Browser vendors (especially chrome) have an interest against privacy, because collecting metadata with techniques like browser fingerprints is their main source of income.It's fucked.
Sigh, niggas talking about privacy while having a; Smartphone, Banking Account, 4chan's Spur.us Whitelisted, Active Internet Conneciton, Google/Outlook Account for Work, etc
And again, don't get too hooked up on whether fingerprint checkers tell you whether your fingerprint is unique or not. The fingerprint is just a collection of identifying features, which are statistically associated with you. Throw some machine learning at it, and minor changes to your fingerprint (like when you try to improve your privacy with addons that promise to make your fingerprint less unique) will not help much after all. Suppose you change your screen resolution. Now some bits of your fingerprint are different, but the large reminder stays the same. You can still be associated. Suppose you install a new system font. Your fingerprint changes, but only the font part of it.Here are some sites which show what information your browser exposes:coveryourtracks.eff.orgcreepjs.orgbrowserleaks.com>>108345622Smartphones, spur, and google accounts are of course closely related to the entire fingerprinting fiasco.
>>108345608Tor and Mullvad browser try to mitigate this with the weird screen thing they have going on. Maybe VMs throw a wrench in this too. Apparently this was needed to bypass sharty fingerprinting.
Here's a nice write up why metadata, as it can collected by browser fingerprinting, is such a threat:mullvad.net/pdfs/Total_surveillance.pdf
>nobody caresOK
>>108345622How would you get by without a bank account?
>>108345629so how do we get around this? There must be some way to prevent them from fingerprinting us. Some tool or something...
>>108345608My fucking fingerprint is too unique.. but I always try to use my extra browser + self deleting cookies/history + a vpn for private browsing. I heard they even use micro benchmarks... fucking JS.
>>108345608>tranime
>>108347244I have no idea. Of course there are special private aware browsers (usually forks of chrome), like >>108345638 says. But most likely you're detectable, and then anti abuse fingerprinters like cloudflare or spur would not let you pass. My only experience with this is the firefox anti fingerprinting setting, which is known to "break" sites or has other uncomfortable consequences.In my uneducated opinion, there are several choices:>fix the webMainstream browsers would have to support fingerprint resistance natively, ditch some features that web devs love, and generally expose exactly the same feature set.System fonts? Replace them with a fixed set of fonts mandated by the html standard.Multimedia? Support only a single format, unless the user approves that the website may try extended formats. This would be great for security too.Fix the damn canvas (it seems to be one of the worst and most popular fingerprinting targets).Artificially slow down and randomize javascript execution speed, unless the user grants special rights to the site.And so on. Browsers like chrome would never agree to this, because Google is interested in tracking users. They would argue that it would make web apps worse, and everyone would agree with them.>try to make the fingerprint as non-unique as possibleThere are multiple tools and special browser forks which try to achieve this, but in my opinion it requires support by mainstream browsers, web standards, and a general web dev culture change.>randomize fingerprint as much as possibleThis would make you unique, but your unique identify would change after a short while. The goal is that fingerprinters only see noise and can't associate a fixed identity with you. I have no idea whether this could work or whether anyone supports it. Most likely, you would still have some bits of non-changing fingerprint, which can identify you.Yeah, I just made this thread because I have no clue and want to learn more about this.
i use canvasblocker, it seemed to stop the GAY NIGGER 4chan rangeban cloudflare shit they use, but I don't know how much it helps in the bigger picture
>>108347403The interesting question is whether it will work again. You changed your canvas fingerprint, which will have some effect, but now...?
