Forwarding this to the list (I was the only one in copy.) [email protected] writes:
> - User Agent > > - HTTP_ACCEPT Headers > > - Browser Plugin Details > > - Time Zone > > - Screen Size and Color Depth > > - System Fonts > > - Are Cookies Enabled? > > - Limited supercookie test > > - There appears to be a long list of parameters: > http://browserspy.dk/ > > There's another detail that I would like to stress out: consistency. > > Say, about a website that requires a user account. > > You can't randomly generate parameters every time you login, due to the very > likely possibility of them keeping a record of them. > > Also, the parameters should not be distributed as the same for everyone. > > The user should be able to choose and also randomly generate, but also keep > "profiles" for various sites. > > (Including it on the mailing list) > > > > On 2014-03-28 20:45, [email protected] wrote: >> Also, would anyone on this list research this issue, write back results >> to the list with a list of elements to work on to reduce fingerprinting, as >> well as potential implementations for this (Or code submissions?) >> >> Just making sure that everyone knows that we need more contributors, >> always. >> >> Loic >> >> [email protected] (Loic J. Duros) writes: >> >>> Julian <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> On 03/27/2014 05:52 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> I am writing to stress out the need of a solution, integrated with >>>>> icecat, to use false browser fingerprints and result in opting-out >>>>> from surveillance. >>>> >>>> Nothing wrong with adding anti-fingerprinting to IceCat, but I just >>>> want to point out that the best way to stop fingerprinting (and >>>> surveillance in general) is to use the Tor Browser Bundle at its >>>> default settings. IceCat can never be as good at stopping tracking as >>>> that, for various reasons. >>> >>> Actually, if we are talking about fingerprinting strictly rather than >>> pure anonimity, I'm not sure how the tor browser fares (I remember the >>> tor browser draft mentioned fingerprinting at some point.) Anything that >>> modifies the behavior of your browser has an effect on >>> fingerprinting. This includes the measures (addons, fixes) taken to >>> block third-party requests, disable a global js variable, and the like. >>> The more the browser is out of the ordinary the more unique its >>> fingerprint. The best way to get a browser to have a more common >>> fingerprint is to have it masquerade as a common browser, running in a >>> common operating system, with the expected behavior of a browser, etc, >>> ... >>> >>> Running stuff that will make your browser more private will make your >>> fingerprint more unique... So it's just a matter of finding the right >>> balance (you still don't want to leak private data), or finding a way to >>> mess with the values/mechanisms used for fingerprinting. >>> >>> Anyway, this is just my personal opinion which I haven't verified >>> recently (more like a year and a half ago.) >>> >>> -- >>> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org >> >> -- >> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
