4 ms·
Unfortunately, it didn't pass the fingerprint test. You can see the results here: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/. On the othe
by uncharted9 2y ago
Unfortunately, it didn't pass the fingerprint test. You can see the results here: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/.
On the other hand, Brave does pass it. I'd like to use Brave for all my browsing, but for some reason the devs haven't been able to get hardware-accelerated video decoding to work in their latest builds. That's why I've been using Librewolf for a very long time.
- IggleSniggle 2y agoI don't buy that cover your tracks applies to the Firefox strategy to privacy. The Firefox strategy is to make your browser incredibly unique every time. If you visit the same website twice, you look very unique but like two totally different visitors. This is effective for real privacy and cover your tracks doesn't account for it well
- uncharted9 2y agoCover Your Tracks shows this kind of obfuscation strategy as "Randomized Fingerprint", but it only shows it for Brave, not for Librewolf when I tested it. Brave fingerprint is unique but it randomizes, while Firefox doesn't.
- akimbostrawman 2y agohaving a unique fingerprint in a group (such as tor browser / resist fingerprint enabling browser) can be better than a individually semi random unique one
- IggleSniggle 2y agoIt's a setting in Firefox that is off by default because it can make some websites super annoying to deal with. But it's easy to get to, and allows you to be totally random per request or per tab-session, iirc