4 ms·
> I would expect that enabling the privacy mode of a browser also sets the DNT header It does not; and since private mode disables the existing cache and cooki
by duozerk 8y ago
> I would expect that enabling the privacy mode of a browser also sets the DNT header
It does not; and since private mode disables the existing cache and cookies, there would be little point anyway (and even with DNT off cookies stored by tracking services will disappear as the private mode is ended). Though if you usually have DNT on, the header will still get sent in private mode.
More generally, I suspect having DNT on is a good way to radically increase the uniqueness of your browser's fingerprint, as it is likely a minority of users have it on; personally I ignore it entirely and just use ublock + privacy badger and similar solutions (that includes noscript - efficient fingerprinting is much much harder without JS).
- modzu 8y agoyou think dnt increases your uniqueness but disabling js doesnt? (youre right tho that w/o js a lot of tricks are off the table)
- chme 8y agoDNT is not about reducing the fingerprint, but transmitting the intention not to be tracked. It might be necessary to establish legislation that forces web server operators to respect this intention and deactivate any server side logging or tracking. But that is not going to happen because the government likes having access to this kind of information.