• Boomkop3@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        …as long as you are blocking tracking cookies, and aren’t on a session with a website that’s tracking you.

        Otherwise, you just have a nice unique hash in your cookies. A password manager could help here.

  • LambdaRX@sh.itjust.worksOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    After disabling extension “I still don’t care about cookies” on Librewolf, I went from 17.48 bits unique fingerprint to 16.48 nearly unique one.

  • Albbi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I misread the title as “Cover your taxes” and got really excited to earn about tax avoidance tips. Legal ones obviously.

  • LastoftheDinosaurs@walledgarden.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 91389.5 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

    Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 16.48 bits of identifying information

    Doesn’t look good. How do you make it so that your browser doesn’t have a fingerprint at all?

    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can’t not have a finger print. You can a best try and look like everyone elses.Sadly the free market won’t care and as such you won’t blend with normal users. Still you can try and look like ever one else in the privacy community

  • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    With browser settings that actually let me use the internet in a way that’s not overly cumbersome and annoying, I get 16bits or something and a “nearly unique fingerprint”

    • themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Block any and all ads, then it doesn’t matter that they have your data if they can’t make money off of it (they still will do that by creating data aggregates but you can’t control that)

  • ripley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It seems like the characteristics of my Android tablet doom me here - I was unique even using Chrome.

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    12.67 from Safari/iPhone, without changing any settings. This is my most commonly used browser

  • Viri4thus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    If you have canvas randomisation turned on (firefox) you’ll always be unique but also not traceable between sessions.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      How do you turn on canvas randomisation in Firefox? I can’t seem to find anything about it.

      • Muehe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I found this in about:config, defaults to true apparently: privacy.resistFingerprinting.randomDataOnCanvasExtract

        But you have to enable privacy.resistFingerprinting for it to work first. I enabled that and now the EFF test says “randomized” for the hashes but also Lemmy went from dark to light theme somehow.

        • perfectly_boiled_pizza@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          privacy.resistFingerprinting breaks a lot more than just themes. Many of the weird problems reported in Firefox (and forks) are just from enabling it.

          It has some pros but also TONNES of cons. Everything from a completely blank page to wrong timestamps to poor textures and so much more. Sometimes you will be flagged as a bot and prompted with literally infinite puzzles, thus effectively banning you from a website.

          Some of these problems get fixed but new ones also get born. I personally use it but I also expect breakage and worse performance.

  • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 183,996 tested in the past 45 days.

    :(

  • muhyb@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Despite having strong protection according to these results, I always get unique fingerprinting from them. Which is scary.

    Edit: Now I tried Tor on my desktop and got:

    Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 628.7 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours. Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 9.3 bits of identifying information.

    • yonder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Same result here. I’m using Gnome-web, which is already pretty niche, so that probably really lowers my score.

  • mac@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Huh mullvad browser got me the lowest. 10.44 bits and a non-unique fingerprint.

    Compared against:

    • Firefox with arkenfox user.js (macOS)
    • Tor (macOS and android)
    • Vanadium (android)
    • Cromite (android)
    • Mull (android)

    I do a vast majority of my browsing on my phone, unfortunately. Vanadium scored the best, but it not having extensions (dark reader is a must) and the navigation bar not being movable to the bottom of the screen keeps me on Mull.

    I don’t love using mullvad for day to day browsing as I can’t whitelist specific cookies to retain. Don’t love having to re 2fa daily.

    • kusivittula@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      if it ran the test again, I’d say yes. but if it just reloads the result page, doesn’t mean anything