3 ms·
There's a site [1][2] that shows just how bad fingerprinting can get. You enter your name in private mode, close your browser then visit the site again and it h
by turblety 8y ago
There's a site [1][2] that shows just how bad fingerprinting can get. You enter your name in private mode, close your browser then visit the site again and it has remembered you.
It would be great to know exactly what percentage of visitors had your same fingerprint. It uses clientjs [3] which I guess let's the "tracker" choose how strict to be.
While it uses a different library, this site [4] can show just how unique you are amongst other visitors. Again that fingerprint will not change even if you close your browser ,wipe your history, restart your computer, etc.
1. https://www.nothingprivate.ml/ https://www.nothingprivate.ml/
2. https://github.com/gautamkrishnar/nothing-private https://github.com/gautamkrishnar/nothing-private
3. https://github.com/jackspirou/clientjs https://github.com/jackspirou/clientjs
4. https://amiunique.org/fp https://amiunique.org/fp
- code_duck 8y agoEFF's Panopticlick is a good resource, too: https://panopticlick.eff.org https://panopticlick.eff.org
- craftyguy 8y agoSince I roll with JS disabled everywhere except a few sites I trust, I get an eternal "Loading... please wait...". Fingerprinting defeated, or just defeated fingerprinting 'test'?
- code_duck 8y agoOf course they need to use JavaScript to fingerprint you to test JavaScript fingerprinting. As far as the whether they keep the information for themselves, since it’s client side, you could potentially audit that.
- craftyguy 8y agoI was under the impression that browsers could be fingerprinted in other ways that didn't require JS.