3 ms·

Here are some further ideas, how to do it: http://www.scatmania.org/2012/04/24/visitor-tracking-without-cookies/ http://www.scatmania.org/2012/04/24/visitor-tra

Here are some further ideas, how to do it: http://www.scatmania.org/2012/04/24/visitor-tracking-without-cookies/ http://www.scatmania.org/2012/04/24/visitor-tracking-without... or simply enhance the mentioned method my HTML5 / CSS3 support (e.g. through http://modernizr.com/ http://modernizr.com/) and you will get even much better results as shown in this study (https://panopticlick.eff.org/browser-uniqueness.pdf https://panopticlick.eff.org/browser-uniqueness.pdf).

hayksaakian 13y ago
would 301 abuse work for IMG tags as well? or is the caching exploit specific to JS?
- gknoy 13y ago
  It sounds like it would absolutely work for images as well, as the article notes that your browser will permanently remember the redirected location, and use that in the future.
- X4 13y ago
  that reminds me to the css :visited browser history hack. I wonder if that still works, or if it could be replaced by your IMG approach. I fear yes. The next ugly site could steal your browser history that way and show which porn sites you've visited, in example.