4 ms·

Ad blockers focus on ads, not fingerprinting.

by j45 7mo ago

mewmewblobcat 7mo ago
Depends on what lists you use. If you use uBlock Origin, and enable most of the lists, it'll target both.
- j45 7mo ago
  Go try it with fingerprint.com. Even post-sanitization, pi-hole, you name it, it will be surprising.
  - streetfighter64 7mo ago
    fingerprint.com seems to be some fingerprinting vendor, they don't even offer a demo without logging in. https://coveryourtracks.eff.org https://coveryourtracks.eff.org is EFFs demo site is non-profit and doesn't require login
    - iso1631 7mo ago
      coveryoutracks always tells me I'm unique Which is concerning. Until you realise I do the same thing a few days later and I'm still unique.
      - mrguyorama 7mo ago
        It tells you that you have a unique fingerprint. It is not telling you that the test site has never seen you before, because the eff isn't storing your fingerprint for later analysis and tracking It could actually tell you about which real tracking vendors are showing you as "Seen and tracked" so it's pretty annoying they don't do that. If that site shows you as having a unique fingerprint, I guarantee you are being tracked across the web. I've seen the actual systems in usage, not the sales pitch. I've seen how effective these tools are, and I haven't even gotten a look at what Google or Facebook have internally. Even no name vendors that don't own the internet can easily track you across any site that integrates with them. The fingerprint is just a set of signals that tracking providers are using to follow you across the internet. It's per machine for the most part, but if you have ever purchased something on the internet, some of the providers involved will have information like your name. Here is what Google asks ecommerce platforms to send them as part of a Fraud Prevention integration using Recaptcha: https://docs.cloud.google.com/recaptcha/docs/reference/rest/v1/projects.assessments#TransactionData https://docs.cloud.google.com/recaptcha/docs/reference/rest/...
        iso1631 7mo ago
        It must store the fingerprints to determine if I'm unique, otherwise everyone would be unique. If it doesn't store the fingerprints then how does it tell the difference between 5 identical looking browsers connecting from 5 different IPs 1 browser connecting 5 times from 5 different IPs
        streetfighter64 7mo ago
        > the EFF isn't storing your fingerprint for later analysis and tracking Yes they are, quoting that very page: > Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 312,935 tested in the past 45 days So clearly they store the information for at least 45 days. This raises the question what they actually mean by unique. If I change my IP and re-test, I get the same > Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 312,941 tested in the past 45 days So does that mean that my fingerprint changed, and they can't track me anymore? Or do they mean to tell me that they still track me and I'm still as uniquely identified. Their methodology and linked articles does not seem to answer this [0] [1] It's all very complicated, because the fingerprinting needs to be unique enough to identify you while still being "persistent" enough not to identify you as somebody else if you change just one bit of it. [0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/primer-information-theory-and-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/primer-information-the... [1] https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/about https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/about
    - KeshiaRose 7mo ago
      This is the Fingerprint demo page (the page itself is a demo): https://fingerprint.com/demo https://fingerprint.com/demo There's also https://demo.fingerprint.com https://demo.fingerprint.com for use case specific demos and more detail on the API response.
    - Fogest 7mo ago
      I have a lot of browser extensions running and am using Brave as my browser. I have their built in adblocker enabled as well as some of their privacy features turned on in the settings. I am also using a self hosted adblock instance for my DNS servers. I actually appear as random and not unique which is really nice to see. I know Brave does intentionally lean on some of the privacy side of things and it also has options to specifically prevent sites from fingerprinting by blocking things like seeing language preferences. I have to assume it is also doing some things in the backend to try and prevent other fingerprinting methods.
- Scoundreller 7mo ago
  > Every time you open LinkedIn in a Chrome-based browser I thought uBlock Origin was now dead in Chrome? I remember a few hacks to keep it going but have now migrated to Firefox (or sometimes Edge…) to keep using it.
  - ronjouch 7mo ago
    Full uBlock Origin is dead in Chrome, yes, but https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home is the next best thing if you cannot leave Chrome
    - idbnstra 7mo ago
      or Vivaldi is chrome based, and it supports full uBlock Origin. If you don't need CHROME chrome, that's even better imo
  - qilo 7mo ago
    Surprisingly full uBO still works on Chrome 146 if launched with the argument --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported
- big_toast 7mo ago
  According to the EFF fingerprinting website, Firefox + uBlock Origin didn't really make my browser particularly unique. But turning on privacy.resistfingerprinting in about:config (or was it fingerprintingProtection?) would break things randomly (like 3D maps on google for me. maybe it's related to canvas API stuff?) and made it hard to remember why things weren't working. Not really sure how to strike a balance of broad convenience vs effectiveness these days. Every additional hoop is more attrition.
- dcdc123 7mo ago
  I use uBlock Origin with basically every filter list enabled on Brave with their default blocker enabled. I just confirmed that this does not prevent the script from loading and scanning extensions. The browser tools network tab on LinkedIn is absolutely frightening.
  - autoexec 7mo ago
    NoScript will prevent that script from loading and scanning extensions. JS is required for almost all fingerprinting and malware spread via websites. Keeping it disabled, at least by default, is the best thing you can do to protect yourself.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
ronjouch 7mo ago
"Ad blockers" nowadays do much more. From the horse’s mouth, which describes itself as a “wide-spectrum content blocker” [1]: “uBlock Origin (uBO) is a CPU and memory-efficient wide-spectrum content blocker for Chromium and Firefox. It blocks ads, trackers, coin miners, popups, annoying anti-blockers, malware sites, etc., by default using EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter Lowe's Blocklist, Online Malicious URL Blocklist, and uBO filter lists. There are many other lists available to block even more [...] Ads, "unintrusive" or not, are just the visible portion of the privacy-invading means entering your browser when you visit most sites. uBO's primary goal is to help users neutralize these privacy-invading methods in a way that welcomes those users who do not wish to use more technical means.” [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-origin-ubo https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-...
- newsoftheday 7mo ago
  I'd like to install uBlock Origin, when I try, Chrome warns it needs the permission to, "Read and change all your data on all websites". That seems excessive, to give that much power to one extension. I currently use no extensions to keep my security posture high.
  - garciansmith 7mo ago
    I never get the fear behind extensions, at least not to the level where you wouldn't use an open-source extension that's extremely well vetted. And even if that isn't good enough for you, choosing to browse the web without using a content blocker is a far, far greater security risk.
  - nickburns 7mo ago
    https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Permissions https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Permissions https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Can-you-trust-uBlock-Origin%3F https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Can-you-trust-uBlock-... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Privacy-policy https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Privacy-policy https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-donations%3F https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-...
throwawayq3423 7mo ago
https://brave.com/privacy-updates/28-sunsetting-strict-fingerprinting-mode/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/28-sunsetting-strict-finge...
autoexec 7mo ago
Disable JS and you've eliminated the vast majority of fingerprinting (besides "blocks JS")
- j45 7mo ago
  alternatively, css can script quite a bit... :)
  - autoexec 7mo ago
    No joke, CSS has gotten out of hand!

Ad blockers focus on ads, not fingerprinting.

by j45 7mo ago

Ad blockers focus on ads, not fingerprinting.

mewmewblobcat 7mo ago

Depends on what lists you use. If you use uBlock Origin, and enable most of the lists, it'll target both.

j45 7mo ago
Go try it with fingerprint.com. Even post-sanitization, pi-hole, you name it, it will be surprising.
- streetfighter64 7mo ago
  fingerprint.com seems to be some fingerprinting vendor, they don't even offer a demo without logging in. https://coveryourtracks.eff.org https://coveryourtracks.eff.org is EFFs demo site is non-profit and doesn't require login
  - iso1631 7mo ago
    coveryoutracks always tells me I'm unique Which is concerning. Until you realise I do the same thing a few days later and I'm still unique.
    - mrguyorama 7mo ago
      It tells you that you have a unique fingerprint. It is not telling you that the test site has never seen you before, because the eff isn't storing your fingerprint for later analysis and tracking It could actually tell you about which real tracking vendors are showing you as "Seen and tracked" so it's pretty annoying they don't do that. If that site shows you as having a unique fingerprint, I guarantee you are being tracked across the web. I've seen the actual systems in usage, not the sales pitch. I've seen how effective these tools are, and I haven't even gotten a look at what Google or Facebook have internally. Even no name vendors that don't own the internet can easily track you across any site that integrates with them. The fingerprint is just a set of signals that tracking providers are using to follow you across the internet. It's per machine for the most part, but if you have ever purchased something on the internet, some of the providers involved will have information like your name. Here is what Google asks ecommerce platforms to send them as part of a Fraud Prevention integration using Recaptcha: https://docs.cloud.google.com/recaptcha/docs/reference/rest/v1/projects.assessments#TransactionData https://docs.cloud.google.com/recaptcha/docs/reference/rest/...
      - iso1631 7mo ago
        It must store the fingerprints to determine if I'm unique, otherwise everyone would be unique. If it doesn't store the fingerprints then how does it tell the difference between 5 identical looking browsers connecting from 5 different IPs 1 browser connecting 5 times from 5 different IPs
      - streetfighter64 7mo ago
        > the EFF isn't storing your fingerprint for later analysis and tracking Yes they are, quoting that very page: > Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 312,935 tested in the past 45 days So clearly they store the information for at least 45 days. This raises the question what they actually mean by unique. If I change my IP and re-test, I get the same > Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 312,941 tested in the past 45 days So does that mean that my fingerprint changed, and they can't track me anymore? Or do they mean to tell me that they still track me and I'm still as uniquely identified. Their methodology and linked articles does not seem to answer this [0] [1] It's all very complicated, because the fingerprinting needs to be unique enough to identify you while still being "persistent" enough not to identify you as somebody else if you change just one bit of it. [0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/primer-information-theory-and-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/primer-information-the... [1] https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/about https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/about
  - KeshiaRose 7mo ago
    This is the Fingerprint demo page (the page itself is a demo): https://fingerprint.com/demo https://fingerprint.com/demo There's also https://demo.fingerprint.com https://demo.fingerprint.com for use case specific demos and more detail on the API response.
  - Fogest 7mo ago
    I have a lot of browser extensions running and am using Brave as my browser. I have their built in adblocker enabled as well as some of their privacy features turned on in the settings. I am also using a self hosted adblock instance for my DNS servers. I actually appear as random and not unique which is really nice to see. I know Brave does intentionally lean on some of the privacy side of things and it also has options to specifically prevent sites from fingerprinting by blocking things like seeing language preferences. I have to assume it is also doing some things in the backend to try and prevent other fingerprinting methods.
Scoundreller 7mo ago
> Every time you open LinkedIn in a Chrome-based browser I thought uBlock Origin was now dead in Chrome? I remember a few hacks to keep it going but have now migrated to Firefox (or sometimes Edge…) to keep using it.
- ronjouch 7mo ago
  Full uBlock Origin is dead in Chrome, yes, but https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home is the next best thing if you cannot leave Chrome
  - idbnstra 7mo ago
    or Vivaldi is chrome based, and it supports full uBlock Origin. If you don't need CHROME chrome, that's even better imo
- qilo 7mo ago
  Surprisingly full uBO still works on Chrome 146 if launched with the argument --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported
big_toast 7mo ago
According to the EFF fingerprinting website, Firefox + uBlock Origin didn't really make my browser particularly unique. But turning on privacy.resistfingerprinting in about:config (or was it fingerprintingProtection?) would break things randomly (like 3D maps on google for me. maybe it's related to canvas API stuff?) and made it hard to remember why things weren't working. Not really sure how to strike a balance of broad convenience vs effectiveness these days. Every additional hoop is more attrition.
dcdc123 7mo ago
I use uBlock Origin with basically every filter list enabled on Brave with their default blocker enabled. I just confirmed that this does not prevent the script from loading and scanning extensions. The browser tools network tab on LinkedIn is absolutely frightening.
- autoexec 7mo ago
  NoScript will prevent that script from loading and scanning extensions. JS is required for almost all fingerprinting and malware spread via websites. Keeping it disabled, at least by default, is the best thing you can do to protect yourself.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

ronjouch 7mo ago

"Ad blockers" nowadays do much more. From the horse’s mouth, which describes itself as a “wide-spectrum content blocker” [1]: “uBlock Origin (uBO) is a CPU and memory-efficient wide-spectrum content blocker for Chromium and Firefox. It blocks ads, trackers, coin miners, popups, annoying anti-blockers, malware sites, etc., by default using EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter Lowe's Blocklist, Online Malicious URL Blocklist, and uBO filter lists. There are many other lists available to block even more [...] Ads, "unintrusive" or not, are just the visible portion of the privacy-invading means entering your browser when you visit most sites. uBO's primary goal is to help users neutralize these privacy-invading methods in a way that welcomes those users who do not wish to use more technical means.” [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-origin-ubo https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-...

newsoftheday 7mo ago
I'd like to install uBlock Origin, when I try, Chrome warns it needs the permission to, "Read and change all your data on all websites". That seems excessive, to give that much power to one extension. I currently use no extensions to keep my security posture high.
- garciansmith 7mo ago
  I never get the fear behind extensions, at least not to the level where you wouldn't use an open-source extension that's extremely well vetted. And even if that isn't good enough for you, choosing to browse the web without using a content blocker is a far, far greater security risk.
- nickburns 7mo ago
  https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Permissions https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Permissions https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Can-you-trust-uBlock-Origin%3F https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Can-you-trust-uBlock-... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Privacy-policy https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Privacy-policy https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-donations%3F https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-...

throwawayq3423 7mo ago

https://brave.com/privacy-updates/28-sunsetting-strict-fingerprinting-mode/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/28-sunsetting-strict-finge...

autoexec 7mo ago

Disable JS and you've eliminated the vast majority of fingerprinting (besides "blocks JS")

j45 7mo ago
alternatively, css can script quite a bit... :)
- autoexec 7mo ago
  No joke, CSS has gotten out of hand!