Re:Browserprint: are you uniquely identifiable?
by userbinator on Monday August 01, 2016 @02:16AM
(#12200508)
The server appears to be timing out but the title and concept reminds me of this: https://panopticlick.eff.org/
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Browserprint: are you uniquely identifiable?
by arviewer on Monday August 01, 2016 @03:21AM
(#12200707)
Is my browser uniquely identifiable? Yes! This is no surprise, not anymore at least.
I pass the first three tests here, but fingerprinting does the trick. About one in 50k browsers has the same fonts as me. About one in 30k browsers have the same addons and plugins. I bet those two don't overlap. Then there are several other variables like language that narrow it down if that is still needed.
They could try to explain how to make a browser not uniquely identifiable however. What browser configuration is not unique? What do I have to do to get that?
Re:Browserprint: are you uniquely identifiable?
by mirimir on Monday August 01, 2016 @07:35AM
(#12201597)
I believe that Tor browser is least uniquely identifiable. That's a major Tor Project goal. Ideally, all Tor users would be using the same browser, with no modifications. There is a privacy/security slider, but there are only four settings.
Re:Browserprint: are you uniquely identifiable?
by notjosh on Monday August 01, 2016 @04:12AM
(#12200853)
The site loaded for me, and says:
> Browserprint is a free open source project designed to provide the same and better functionality as the original Panopticlick.
(Though I'm not sure exactly what they've done to make it better..but the hat tip is there at least!)
Re:Browserprint: are you uniquely identifiable?
by cm2187 on Monday August 01, 2016 @04:22AM
(#12200882)
And panopticlick isn't exactly new. Have browser vendors done anything to deal with browser fingerprinting? It is a little concerning that now pretty much all browsers are developed or sponsored by companies that aim at monetizing their users data (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, etc).