What score does your browser(s) get?

I’ll start: I got:

one in ~25000 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours

    • Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Please also consider things like canvas spoofing. It will create a unique fingerprint that is different every time.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Unique among the people who use that website. So if nobody else if you’re configuration ever tried that website… You would be unique

      The bits of entropy are the more important parts of the results. The lower the bits the better

  • Leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    CreepJS is much better (and scarier) at fingerprinting you than EFF. I’ve not managed to completely fool it yet but I’ve got my score down to 0% trust, meaning the fingerprint it generates is pretty useless. I suspect the only way to totally fool it (by which I mean spoof my devices) would be to turn JS off completely.

    • relevants@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      On Safari 17 every time I visit the site it claims it’s my first visit, despite a trust score of 57%. Not sure if I’m interpreting the results wrong or ITP is just doing its job.

      • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        iOS 17 Safari (especially with enhanced fingerprint protection on) is really good at fingerprint protection. It rotates a few data points like canvas ID so that it makes you look like a new fingerprint each time.

        Fingerprint analyzers can find out lots about your fingerprint that way, but if your fingerprint keeps changing, it becomes difficult to identify you. Unique fingerprints don’t mean anything if your fingerprint keeps changing.

        • relevants@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s what I was kind of thinking/hoping based on the results, but I wasn’t sure if I was understanding it right. Thanks for elaborating!

          • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Imagine I keep a log of everyone I encounter… their race, hair colour, eye colour, glasses shape, accent, gender, fingernail length, ear lobe shape, everything. I would probably encounter the same people every so often, and I would be able to recognize them from my log.

            Now imagine that one of them started dying their hair and putting in coloured contact lenses, and they changed it up every day. I may be able to collect all of the details about them. They’re very unique. But… I couldn’t match them against anyone in my log, even though I’ve seen them multiple times.

            Having a unique browser fingerprint is perfectly fine if it constantly changes. They can collect all of those details about you, but if you keep changing key details, they won’t be able to recognize you.

  • aindriu_b@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I got “unique among the 185,973 tested in the past 45 days”

    Edit: this is using Firefox Android Nightly with UBlock + Canvas Blocker

    • dsemy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Mullvad browser + extensions is pointless, might as well use LibreWolf or just harden Firefox yourself.

      The point of the Mullvad browser is to not stand out from the crowd; by installing extensions you are definitely standing out.

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’ve an unique fingerprint, but different fp results in every test run, with mostly wrong sys specs, only it shows correct my country, nothing else. Same in Browserleaks.

  • dsemy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    There is also fingerprint.com, which I tend to trust more since it’s a company that literally sells fingerprinting tech to other companies.

    It managed to identify me while using the Tor browser on “Safer” (doesn’t work on “Safest” due to JS). Edit: this is likely due to an issue with my install, and not the browser itself.

  • akilou@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 93387.5 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

    Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 16.51 bits of identifying information.

    But also

    Your browser has a nearly-unique fingerprint

    I don’t get it

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s a couple issues going on here. Number one is it’s unique amongst the people who go to EFFs website cover your tracks. That’s not all of the internet users. Hell that’s not even most of the internet users. It’s pretty niche community.

      The bits of identifying information are the critical key here. 16 bits, 2 ^ 16… 65,000 different possibilities. Each piece of information you give, makes it a little bit easier to track you. Things like language, time zone… The more bits, the easier it is to identify you. The less bits, the more you blend into the crowd.

      This is why multiple people, including myself, have talked about fingerprint.com they’re professional service, who’s targeting websites, who want to track users. So they’re incentivized to track as best as able.

      Even if you’ve got a great EFF score, you should always check fingerprint.com, to see if they can track you.