Visited on my mobile this morning while commuting and no VPN and it geo located me 1000 miles away.
Visited again connected to a WiFi network and it got me right. Fun stuff
That post seems to be missing.
jet 6 points 3 years ago
Thats pretty common for cellular data. Your IP is based on the exit of the mobile network, not the tower you connect with, but the data center of your provider. Which could be thousand of miles away
random65837 -2 points 3 years ago path: 0 5100269 5153455, hotness: undefined, score: -2, children: 3
random65837 -3 points 3 years ago path: 0 5100269 5153455 5158893 5160392, hotness: undefined, score: -3, children: 1
downpunxx 17 points 3 years ago
My impression is the thing with modern day ad tracking, selling information to spammers, and hackers is, even if you secure your browser tighter than a drum, any one of your browser extensions, which we've given permission to read all site data on every site you visit and interact with, could be keeping extensive logs on your activity and selling that away to the highest bidder. Am I understanding that right?
nottheengineer 11 points 3 years ago
Yes and that's why you stick to popular FOSS stuff.
Contend6248 6 points 3 years ago
And even then, decide if you really need 20 addons really bad, less is better.
privacybro 14 points 3 years ago
I have been doing fingerprint research for several years. I've done countless builds with various browsers, configurations, extensions, and strategies. (Yes i have too much time for this).
Here is what I've concluded. I hope this helps someone.
CoverYourTrack is crap, plain and simple. Your best option will always be to randomize. Always. You will not "blend in". I don't care if you run Google Chrome on Windows 10 or Safari on iOS, JavaScript exposes way too much info, you will always have a unique fingeprint. Just go play around with fingerprint.com on some normie browser/os setups and you will see what i mean.
You must randomize all the values that you see on sites like browserleaks.com. canvas, audio context, webgl hash, clientrects, fonts, etc etc. I'd also make sure you are proxifying all your browsers and using random locations. You can do this with Brave somewhat, which has some randomization stuff in it. You can do this with browser extensions as well. Ungoogled chromium also has some randomization for canvas and clientrects i think
There are only a couple options outside of this that I recommend, in the realm of "generic fingerprint" solutions. TOR browser (they have been on the front lines of this for many years). And also Mullvad browser, which, despite its generic fingerprint goal, seems to also defeat fingerprint.com.
Tldr, if you want the best experience out of the box that is also very usable, just use Mullvad Browser. They are basically the browser i wished for for like a decade.
wilberfan 13 points 3 years ago
Well that's interesting. I've read more than one place the having uBlock Origin is "enough" and that adding Privacy Badger is overkill. I've also got AdGuard Home running on a Pi-4. I failed all three tests with Vivaldi Nightly and Arc Browser--both with uBO installed....
Simply adding Privacy Badger to the existing setup, suddenly I had "strong web protection".
[edit] Firefox passed without having to add Privacy Badger.
MonkderZweite 4 points 3 years ago
uBlock Origin + Canvas Blocker is it for me. And Total Cookie Protection enabled, wasm disabled, referer trimmed.
- sendRefererHeader 1
- referer.trimmingPolicy 2
- referer.XOriginPolicy 1
- referer.XOriginTrimmingPolicy 2
downpunxx 1 point 3 years ago
thanks for the tip, i'm already on firefox, but when run it said i had "some protection" for both blocking tracking ads, and blocking invisible trackers, added privacy badgers after reading your post, because why not, and now it says YES for both
17.54 bits of identifying information tho :0
deranger 10 points 3 years ago
You should post the # of bits of identifying info it was able to derive. Best I’m able to do is 15 bits or so. Never seen it below 14, meaning you’re able to be nearly uniquely fingerprinted everywhere.
e-ratic 7 points 3 years ago
Tor browser gives 6.8 bits, with javascript disabled https://files.catbox.moe/d74wf1.png
mateomaui 4 points 3 years ago
While everyone’s at it, you may want to check for leaks with Mullvad VPN’s service, it picked up a DNS leak for me that got past a few other sites:
edit: also ipleak.net, which tests a few other things, like torrent ips
LostXOR 3 points 3 years ago
Huh, it says I'm leaking DNS servers and WebRTC IPs, but I don't have secure DNS enabled, and I'm not really sure why WebRTC leaking my IP is a problem considering I'm already "leaking" my IP just by visiting a website.
mateomaui -3 points 3 years ago
In my case I had reset a device and didn’t disable IPv6. Once I fixed that the bottom two tests still say I’m “leaking”, but all three show only one IP each, for my VPN’s servers (maybe different IPs, but one for each.)
If I were actually leaking, IPs shown would be for a local DNS, or my residence, etc.
elbarto777 3 points 3 years ago path: 0 5100799 5106900, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 4
Contend6248 4 points 3 years ago
Just use CanvasBlocker, it changes your ID randomly.
https://canvasblocker.kkapsner.de/faq/
Page X claims my fingerprint is unique.
Having a unique fingerprint is fine as long as it changes. With the default settings of CanvasBlocker the fingerprint should change all the time.
flamingarms 2 points 3 years ago
It should be noted that canvas is only one method of fingerprinting, so just randomizing that will not be enough to prevent fingerprinting.
elbarto777 1 point 3 years ago path: 0 5100799 5106900 5108520 5113312, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1
Contend6248 2 points 3 years ago
No problem, faking instead of blocking canvas is the way to go, for example the new captcha by Cloudflare uses countless queries to check the browsers validity: https://blog.cloudflare.com/...
I'm guessing that if you block it sites will either block you entirely or give you a fallback old captcha.
Melody 9 points 3 years ago
I've got really good scores. I'm grading a bit on a curve due to mitigations/spoofs already in place for both browsers that fool the scripts effectively.
4.45 bits from Firefox. ["System Fonts" is the worst score]
4.47 bits from LibreWolf. ["AudioContext Fingerprint" is the worst score
Some Measurements are Ignored; reasons within.
User Agent - Flawed. This contains no personally identifiable information and spoofing this often causes compatibility and functionality issues. It is OK to spoof for -MORE- functionality if needed.
WebGL Vendor & Renderer - Spoofed/Blocked Firefox spoofs this via CanvasBlocker and LibreWolf blocks this from being accessed at all. Spoofing allows some websites to feel "satisfied" they have some fingerprint that is otherwise patent nonsense and CanvasBlocker will present the same value to the website/script later if it's loaded in the same Container/Context.
Screen Size and Color Depth - Spoofed/Blocked Both Firefox and LibreWolf will spoof/randomize/standardize these viewport values back to scripts to preserve privacy. For functionality reasons my LibreWolf installation is my minimal plugin environment. This allows me to quickly and temporarily load a website I might NEED to use without compromising on Privacy while not being forced to troubleshoot which plugins might be preventing the site from loading in Firefox.
System Fonts - LibreWolf Only Spoofed/Blocked Value is Randomized
spacedance 6 points 3 years ago
What settings/addons do you recommend?
WarmSoda 8 points 3 years ago
I found this looking around the site:
In order to get this extra level of protection, your browser needs to have a fingerprint which is either:
so common that a tracker can't tell you apart from the crowd (as in Tor Browser), or
randomized so that a tracker can't tell it's you from one moment to the next (as in Brave browser).
Google's Chrome browser does not provide protection against trackers or fingerprinters in Incognito Mode.
mojo 5 points 3 years ago
Yes, you can do it manually by enabling resistFingerprinting, but the easiest way is to just install LibreWolf browser which is a fork of Firefox. Or Mull which is practically the same thing, but Android.
privacybro 3 points 3 years ago
Mullvad browser is the best i think
TWeaK 1 point 3 years ago
It doesn't suit me personally, I want more extensions. In particular, I use uMatrix, as it gives a little more flexibility than uBlock Origin even in authormode. I've been able to bypass paywalls by targeting elements from a domain, rather than the domain itself. But also there are plenty of quality of life extensions I rely on, eg gestures.
Mullvad is very good out of the box though, I'll give it that. And I use Mull on Android quite happily (although this does allow more extensions, pretty sure the two aren't affiliated).
theodewere 1 point 3 years ago
it means good security
mintycactus 3 points 3 years ago path: 0 5097668 5098179 5098349, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 6
mintycactus 3 points 3 years ago path: 0 5097668 5098179 5098349 5098398 5098449, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
mateomaui 0 points 3 years ago
If you have something useful to say just skip to that.
edit: regarding the randomized fingerprint result only, spare me the Brave lecture, it’s not going to be my main browser anyway.
KarnaSubarna 8 points 3 years ago
OS: Ubuntu 23.10 | Browser: Firefox 119 | Add-on: No-Script | Misc: AdGuardHome on Raspberry Pi 4B
Edit: Uploaded Full image for Comparison with Mullvad Browser.
KarnaSubarna 5 points 3 years ago
Same setup, but with Mullvad Browser
swayevenly 7 points 3 years ago
Anyone know how I can get improved fingerprinting results on Firefox Android? Currently its at 16.56 bits and it says I have strong protection against web tracking. NoCanvas isn't availble on Android devices.
swayevenly 3 points 3 years ago
Thanks. I'll give it a try.
mateomaui 6 points 3 years ago
Using Firefox on iPhone
edit: Nvm previous result, I got the same result OP did with Firefox and Safari, I realized I was testing on my wifi with a pihole… switched to mobile network only and protection dropped to partial.
edit2: but Firefox Focus still has strong protection:
cyborganism 6 points 3 years ago
Yeah I got the same result.
I wonder in the fingerprint is a spoof and the result is a false positive? Because Mozilla says there is fingerprint protection in Firefox.
mateomaui -3 points 3 years ago
I seem to get that same result on iPhone for Firefox, Safari and Brave
edit: see original reply
Firefox Focus still has “strong” result.
I get “Partial Protection” on Chrome and two generic named browsers, and a flat-out “No” for Opera Mini
Before anyone asks “why” about anything listed here, I have to test webpages for compatibility across browsers. Having them installed is the only way to do that.
KarnaSubarna 6 points 3 years ago
I personally consider this[1] to be the ultimate test of Browser fingerprint protection coverage. Let me know if you manage to find a way to defeat this test.
KarnaSubarna 6 points 3 years ago
This is another good website for Browser leak/privacy settings test.
Lodra 3 points 3 years ago
I got the same as @mintycactus@lemmy.world using Firefox Focus on IOS. Which I’m rather pleased by
ShitOnABrick 2 points 3 years ago
I've been using this for years m8. Propa bit of software
MonkderZweite 0 points 3 years ago
Meh, "Protecting you from fingerprinting?" doesn't load.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...
The EFF site is great, it tells you how many bits of information are identifiable.
If you think you have good protection, go to http://fingerprint.com and see if they can track you across multiple visits. This is a commercial fingerprinting company, on their homepage they have a tracking widget to demonstrate how good they are. So it's always useful to use fingerprint.com to get an empirical test of if you're trackable.
save