3 ms·
Not sure what I'm supposed to see, however this is my Firefox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/iiahhn1hb05nm5w/Screenshot%202019-08-19%2012.41.17.png?dl=0 https://www
by bad_user 7y ago
Not sure what I'm supposed to see, however this is my Firefox:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/iiahhn1hb05nm5w/Screenshot%202019-08-19%2012.41.17.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/iiahhn1hb05nm5w/Screenshot%202019-...
And this is my Safari (with the most popular content blocker active):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4n4hxbnumcyqegu/Screenshot%202019-08-19%2012.41.34.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/4n4hxbnumcyqegu/Screenshot%202019-...
So my Firefox has less bits of entropy than my Safari, although I do admit that my Firefox has a custom configuration (it isn't out of the box), but so does my Safari.
Also Firefox might have plenty to work on in regards to resisting fingerprinting techniques, however there are ongoing projects for that, for importing techniques already used in the Tor Browser:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Fingerprinting https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Fingerprinting
And Firefox does protect against entities known to practice fingerprinting, which you can't say about Safari:
https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/04/09/protections-against-fingerprinting-and-cryptocurrency-mining-available-in-firefox-nightly-and-beta/ https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/04/09/protectio...
- xvector 7y agoI got 13 bits from Safari. Safari 12 introduced advanced fingerprinting resistance, I think they’re pretty far ahead of Firefox here.