4 ms·
Exactly. IP address identification is the elephant in the room that the article just briefly mentions. Nearly all websites that want to target adds to you use t
by misja111 4y ago
Exactly. IP address identification is the elephant in the room that the article just briefly mentions. Nearly all websites that want to target adds to you use that. It's just so simple to use, you can't switch it off like you can with cookies, except of course by using a VPN but almost nobody does that.
- ridgered4 4y agoI often see the narrative on here that consumer VPN providers are almost useless for privacy due to other fingerprinting methods, which I've never really bought.
- tejohnso 4y agoI just tested at fingerprint.com using mullvad. Brave browser, no VPN, they recorded one visit, one IP. Brave browser, no VPN, incognito, they recorded two visits, one IP. Brave browser, with VPN, incognito, recorded three visits, two IPs. I'm pretty impressed / surprised. A fresh incognito session, through a VPN, still matched the same fingerprint. Especially surprising since TFA indicates Brave randomizes the fingerprint. I even changed my fingerprint block setting to "strict, may break sites" and it's still recording the same visitor ID from Brave, even with incognito.
- figglestar 4y agoJust tried this with VPN + firefox resist fingerprinting. I cleared cookies and session data and reloaded, it recorded 1 visit 1 ip for the first (obviously) and second tries. I did not change my VPN connection between attempts. Based on this test I'm surprised Brave's fingerprint resister did not work for you. But on firefox the enhanced privacy protection (strict) and the resistfingerprinting option are two different knobs.