News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Crooked Style Sheeding – Webpage tracking using only CSS by kodablah on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @08:47AM (#16158080)
> It doesn't; without media queries you can't detect thing like browser window size or screen pixel density.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I shouldn't have said media queries, I should have said "CSS property queries". What CSS properties you have doesn't leak any more than your UA I would guess.

> There's a lot of trade-offs here [...]

I'll take it as an option to have a strict subset (though would prefer it as opt-out to discourage font-list-based fingerprinting as a practice, though metric-based may never leave). With downloadable fonts, I don't really like the "script they want" excuse. For accessibility reasons, I am admittedly naive, but I would assume it would be a substitute for an existing font name. Unique font names per user seem unnecessary.

Re:Crooked Style Sheeding – Webpage tracking using only CSS by talmand on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @10:39AM (#16158910)
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I shouldn't have said media queries, I should have said "CSS property queries". What CSS properties you have doesn't leak any more than your UA I would guess.

>> Unique font names per user seem unnecessary.

As a dev that has worked in CSS for over a decade, I have no idea what either of those mean.

EDIT: I see the unique font names part now, totally missed that while focusing on the other parts.

Re:Crooked Style Sheeding – Webpage tracking using only CSS by kodablah on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @01:51PM (#16160948)
By "CSS property queries" I mean the technique in TFA using @supports + before/after-content URLs to query whether certain CSS properties are supported.
Re:Crooked Style Sheeding – Webpage tracking using only CSS by talmand on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @02:27PM (#16161389)
I see my problem now, I don't see @supports as a query like in terms of media queries.