Re:The privacy nightmare of browser fingerprinting
by tempest_ on Saturday November 22, 2025 @03:52PM
(#46018149)
I had forgotten I was running Ublock origin / Privacy Badger / Ghostry so I was a bit confused with the results from that site.
I think it is Ghostry that is faking the responses but I still have a pretty unique fingerprint according to https://abrahamjuliot.github.io/creepjs/
Re:The privacy nightmare of browser fingerprinting
by ifh-hn on Saturday November 22, 2025 @06:51PM
(#46019419)
Isn't ghostry compromised? Having been bought out by an ad company?
Re:The privacy nightmare of browser fingerprinting
by nativeit on Saturday November 22, 2025 @08:27PM
(#46019905)
As near as I can tell, it’s always been owned by Cliqz, who produced some privacy-focused browsers (named Dawn or Lumen) and a search engine (Tailcat) that was ultimately purchased by Brave. The whole thing is majority owned by a German media group, Hubert Burda Media, and while its missions towards increased privacy seem to be sincere, I don’t know if I’d trust them implicitly.
All that said, the main project looks to be open sourced under a GPL3 license, so distrust and verify: https://github.com/ghostery
My GPU is reported as simply "Mozilla" by https://abrahamjuliot.github.io/creepjs/.
The number of cores is also set to 4 for everyone using this config and/or Tor.
> It's not going to work, because the fingerprinting script can be (and is often served) from first-party domain.
This may be true, but allowed third party content makes it trivially easy for Google and others to follow people around the Internet through fonts delivery systems among others.