/g/ - Technology

How can I into making my browser more anonymous?

>>43481508
>can you beat my high score, /g/?

>>43481541
uniqueness and more bits are bad things, bro

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 22.08 bits of identifying information.

How fix?

>>43481548
I actually am special snowflake. You're just one dude out of 1000. would disagree about this being a bad thing.

>>43481508
>Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 8,640 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Noscript is your friend.

>>43481508
You still convey 10 bits of information. which is low on Panopticlick's dataset. On other datasets, it could be enough to uniquely identify you.

>>43481566
lower numbers are better

you're still 7365 off beating the score

GEE TELL ME HOW I DO INTO MAKING ME TRU ANONYMOUS LEGION!!

>>43481508
Suck it.

>>43481601
jelly

Apparently i'm the first German htc Windows Phone user in their dataset. Unique.

>>43481616
IM NOT JELLY U JUST MAD CUZ OF MY MLG HACKING SKILLS!! XD

>>43481548
>2014
>Not being a special snowflake
>Not ricing out your browser to the max

well it gets more bits from me, but wrong ones

>>43481508

good job, the NSA will have a had time tracking you as you shitpost on /g/ and masturbate

1/xx is good the higher xx is right?

>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,423,817 tested so far.

I'm a pathetic and careless browser and I don't give a shit.

>1 in 3.4 browsers have no javascript
Mostly google bot right?

>>43481617
...and likely the only HTC Windows Phone user on the planet within their dataset.

>>43481614
y-you know a unique fingerprint is the worst result you can get, right?

>Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 86,743 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

>Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 16.4 bits of identifying information.

Using Lynx

>>43481820
People who care about their browser fingerprint likely have NoScript, HTTPSwitchboard or something like that installed, which skews the statistics.

>>43481713
Nope. The point is to make it so you blend in rather than stand out by being unique.

>>43481614
HAHAHAHAA YOU'RE FUCKING RETARDED

>>43481919
But that's exactly what he said.

>>43481614
b8

>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,423,981 tested so far.
what do I win?

>>43481980
customized ads!

Umm?

This website makes me sad :(

>>43481945
No, if xx is higher that means that only one in xx have his fingerprint. His fingerprint should be as common as possible, meaning that xx should be as low as possible. Therefore 1/xx is good the lower xx is.

I win?

Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,424,049 tested so far.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 22.08 bits of identifying information.

The measurements we used to obtain this result are listed below. You can read more about our methodology, statistical results, and some defenses against fingerprinting in this article.

With scripts disabled (my normal browsing style) I get one in 113,572, otherwise I'm a special snowflake too.

ITT people misunderstand statistics

>>43481541
>>43481614
>>43481713
>>43481980
>>43482047
>>43482158
jesus fuck, /g/

>>43482194
>by_magicswordz.jpg

for firefox, use random agent spoofer and noscript addons

>>43482199
>not understanding metairony

>>43481692
Plugins?

how is it that I fucked up? I always assume that every machine running windows is already compromised, but is windows so bad that it actually is a tell all sign for them? Or is it my browser config?

unique
get rekt sheeples

attempt 2, first one was unique.

>>43482331
Very few are on firefox 33 yet. Spoof your user agent.

>>43482352

>>43481832
>>43481933
>>43481973
>>43482194
>2014
>Not striving to be a special snowflake

>Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 92,171 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

what do i win

Easiest way to lower the number is to use one of the most popular browser's user agent. Aka Google Chrome.

>>43481508
i dont understand
itseems everybody is searching to get a unique fingerprint?
but the goal is to have the most common fingerprint so you're not unique no?

>>43482907
you are missing the point
FUCK YOU GOOGLE

>>43482907
Security in numbers.

hlp pls

I wonder if enough people spoof user agent to affect OS and browser marketshare statistics

Yay, higher numbers are better, right?

what is most popular user agent?

>>43483027
Atleast change your user agent.

>>43483168
Google chrome or GoogleBot I guess

block java and flash (no fonts info)
plugins.enumerable_names leave that empty (no Browser Plugin Details)

>>43483255
full string please

how does that gets my resolution>

Welp the NSA knows everything I'm doing now.

>>43481508
#noragrats
#yolo
#kony2012

>>43483255
>>43483315
Nope, says Firefox here:
https://panopticlick.eff.org/self-defense.php
Probably influenced by the eff's audience though.

which one of you?

Are there any firefox addons that hide your plugin info? I run noscript but I don't want it leaking on sites that I allow no matter what

>>43481508
Please tell your user agent string. Can't find anything that common. Telling it to us makes it even more common.

>>43483079

No

>>43481508
you retards realize that just because you aren't unique here doesn't mean you aren't unique out in the web.

for starts, just blocking javascript is an immediate, unique, redflag outside of this retarded test.

>>43483627
That's certainly true, but it's still better than not blocking javascript. If no javascript makes you rare, what you leak with it on makes you unique no matter where you go.

>>43482194

How the fuck do we fix it?

Disable Javascript you gigantic faggots

>>43484432

>>43483627

>>43484534
In what way would disabling javascript make your browser more unique outside of the test? Are you going to tell me that I should activate javascript to make myself less trackable? Yeah, fucking right. Canvas-Fingerprinting works with information mostly gathered by javascript. Certainly it is not the only thing you have to do but it is a good start.

>>43481508
kwl site OP
unique with desktop ff =/
but 1 in 737k with ff on android.

Pale Moon has started randomizing some of the data to guarantee you're always unique, but you'll appear as a different unique each time so they can't correlate you to your previous visits. Good move?

>Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 11,992 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

>Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 13.55 bits of identifying information.

Is this good or bad?

Why does this happen? I'm on 1920x1080. In Chromium it shows up properly but on Firefox it shows 1728x972 which doesn't make any sense.

>bits
>float

>>43485480
windows

>>43485465
good.
Since you are quite common they can't track you.

so if I install a single obscure font I become a whole lot easier to track?

>one in 21,377 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

th-thanks noscript

>>43485576
turn off flash and java

>>43482331
>No javascript
Enjoy your not being able to post.

We need a guide to become a greyman

>>43481508
>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,424,985 tested so far.
I'm special.

>>43481692
Which VM are you running

shit I really fucked up. I need to install all them privacy add-ons. I only did it on my Debian install not on my windows one which is probably more important

>>43481508
Everybody in the thread got tricked. By even visiting the site, you've already lost. Who do you think pulls the strings of the EFF? What do you think they're going to do now that they've built a massive fingerprint database of ostensible "tech-savvy" users? You idiots wanted to pat yourself on the back about how careful and secure and elite you are, so you voluntarily turned over all your information to people who will use it for nefarious purposes.

>this page has security vulnerabilities

into the trash

>>43486097
> being this dense

I figured out how to beat Panopticlick

>go to Panopticlick - it says you're unique
>clear cookies and change IP
>go to Panopticlick again -- it says you're 1 in 2 million
>clear cookies and change IP
>go to Panopticlick again -- it says you're 1 in 1.5 million
>clear cookies and change IP
>go to Panopticlick again -- it says you're 1 in 1 million
>clear cookies and change IP
>go to Panopticlick again -- it says you're 1 in 880 thousand
>continue until you're satisfied

>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,167 tested so far.

Good thing most of it is false info which is different for ever website I visit.
I love Firefox addons.

BRAVO GATES
R
A
V
O

G
A
T
E
S

that site looks terrible
no pics and stuff

>>43486387
show us your score fag

>>43486403

>>43486382
Good Heavens, just look at the Time[zone]!

>>43485982
Oy vey! I told you six million times to shut up and keep the goyim falling in the trick

>>43486601
Arizona, the home of the herbin' cowboy

http://pastebin.com/FWQfWTRY

here you go fay/g/ets. don't get mad if some of your shit sites break. read before you do shit

Here's something I found from an older thread.

>>43481541

Funny how my Opera also gives this result, 12.17 master race reporting in.

>>43486942
>thinks being unique is good
wut

>>43481508
Ez. I managed to get the beyond-unique of "impossible to fingerprint" because it segfaults my browser.

Here's an image of the stacktrace from running surf with flash enabled at this address:

>>43487037
>flash
What is that?

>>43481508
i'm unique with flashblock and noscript. wut. I guess it's the resolution?

>>43487080
Try making plugins.enumerable_names in about:config blank.

why do so many of you have flash installed and enabled? it's not 2001 anymore. get rid of it.

>>43487373
muh youtube/soundcloud

>>43483627
Without javacript they can't track across different sites though.

>>43487384
you can use youtube without flash since like two years ago

>>43487080
Try actually using NoScript. Your screenshot tells me that you've got javascript enabled.

>>43487080
Mine is "unique" and I don't have anything installed

>>43487428
But you are limited to shit resolution unless your browser supports MSE.

>>43487527
i'm fine with no 1080p since everything looks like shit on youtube anyway, and the sound profiles for AAC in 1080p/720p are the same.

>>43487527
>shit resolution
I don't expect 1080p quality from youtube anyway. I also have no problem giving that up to not use flash.

>>43481508
>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,618 tested so far.

get on my level faggot

>>43481508
>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,624 tested so far.
Bitch nigga, get on my level.
I didn't even enable javascript.

what are some common user agents I can use?

>Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 2,212,836 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

>Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 21.08 bits of identifying information.

Never heard of Secret Agent?

i'm guessing the font sets are a big part of what makes my fingerprint unique, guess not many people have those Solid Edge fonts installed.

> Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,840 tested so far.
b-but i like my DWB

>>43481508
>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,875 tested so far.
huehuehu

>>43488390
>>43487745
>>43487708


Jesus christ /g/

Unique = the worst possible outcome

>>43488566
but then again, should i just use IE like every other faggot?

>>43488614
Why would you think that would possibly help you

Hmm.

ITT: /g/ doesn't know shit about technology

Consumerist whores

Cm11 with chrome was unique, K.

>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,425,996 tested so far. >Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 22.08 bits of identifying information.
cool

>>43488885
>>43488965
The goal is to not be unique, you let the ball in the net, you fucking lost, are you an idiot?

>>43488566
Nobody cares about your baseless paranoia. Contain your autism.

>>43489000
see >>43489017

>>43487923
http://techpatterns.com/forums/about304.html

>>43487963
I installed it on firefox, looks good

8.37

>>43489017
>>43489035
Don't fucking post in the thread then.

>>43489137
But mocking autistic people is the only way I can get an erection.

I'd rather be unique so I don't get correlated with somebody else. What if somebody with the same browser fingerprint as you is a terrorist or a pedophile or a Muslim? The more unique your fingerprint is, the less likely that is to happen.

Must have fucked up while setting up my useragent, could a windows user using firefox 31 give me his user agent?

>>43489271
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/31.0

http://pastebin.com/fdvrnyGa

For everyone who is 'unique' or wanting to lower their score, I saved a post here a while back with some privacy tips (Blender alone got me from ~500k browsers down to OPs level)

>>43489292
>Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/31.0
Much better, thanks a lot.
I wish firefox stopped changing version numbers so fast, changing the user agent everytime there"s an update's really tedious.

This is the best i could do.

>>43485480
Change your DPI settings.

>>43481614
>32bit OS

I'm happy with this, considering I don't sacrifice any functionality with it. Sure that getting a ridiculously common browser is possible, but not without some effort.

>>43489363
So use the user agent of an ESR release, those only change once a year and stuff like TBB is based on ESR releases so it's not that unique.

>>43489090
noice, what do you use?

So I have been thinking, what if you took the set of non-unique user agents (so that you are rarely actually unique), and display a random one for each new page? That way it gets even harder to track you across pages >>43482212


>>43489237
the more unique it is, the more likely you are to be correlated with very few people.

What if you are correlated with only one person instead of 10? Does not that mean you are in a worse spot?

Fags, just install Blender for FF.

>>43489336
thanks

>>43481508
What do I win?

>>43489547
>Bloating your browser when you only need to change a line in your about:config

>go to about:config
>enter new string
>general.useragent.override
>fill it with this
>Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)
>install noscript
Problem solved.

>>43489542
Pale Moon randomizes some stuff in the plugin data (like the installation order) so that you'll appear different on each page load.

Of course they'll probably just uniquely identify you as "that one asshole who uses Pale Moon".

>>43489594
Half the shit recommended ITT is bloat. You don't need ABE _AND_ a shitton of plzdonttrackme addons.

You can get EasyPrivacy which blocks fucking everything from the get go.

If you're not a criminal, why do you care about fingerprinting?

>>43489638
Do you think google bots crawl search enginges? Pages that were specifically disallowed in robots.txt?

>>43489726
disable js
empty ua

"Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 25,885 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

>>43489722
>implying

Hell yes! Seems like I'm safe from NSA and the like.

>>43481508
Within our dataset of 4.3 billion visitors your IP address appears to be unique :^)

>>43489090
tell us how you got that anon

Screen res plays a big part in it
my 1920x1080 score >>43489368
<<1280x768 score

How do i stop it from reporting the resolution?

>>43489919
install noscript

>>43489852
aren't you behind 7 proxies? do you have a static IP? are you a newfriend?

my browser is unique but I am using user agent / language spoofing

gud?

>>43490095
Are you spoofing to the same thing every time?
Are you spoofing to something obviously malformed?

>>43489957
I have noscript already.
Blocking it just feels like cheating to me.

>>43481508
>use Blender
>still unique
what

>>43490587
post your values

>>43492115
though it's probably just your addons anyway
use noscript

>>43492133
>>43492115
My guess is a combination of plugins and fonts. Why fonts is beyond me

>Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 4,426,810 tested so far.
Ok

Why is it bad to be unique among only 4 million when there are over 7 billion people on the planet?

>>43492312
With EFF forbidden by NS
"Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 20,590 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours."

>>43481508
I'm fucking unique
"at least 22.08 bits of identifying information"
fuck everything

>>43481508
Okay, OP, you've had your fun.
Now show us the values.

>>43492423
yeah op spill the beans, you'll get more using it and we can all blend in together

>>43481508
lynx says one in 2,213,439 are the same as mine.

What is the most default fingerprint you can possibly have? Assuming javascript is disabled what pieces of information can they even gather?

This site is designed like shit. Let me break it down so everyone can understand how the scores work.
Low Number > High number > Unique

>>43492339
dis niqqa srs?

>>43492439
Nah fuck that, I want this guy >>43489090 to show us

>>43489090
>>43492562
shit we need that one then.

probably some android ua with all those shitty things around the world.

>my rarely-used chrome is unique
>so is my firefux
This computer is *almost* stock software thu :(

Beat this motherfucker

shit

>>43492677
>wget
heheheh

For Chrome, install Chameleon. Makes Chrome as fingerprint-proof as TorBrowser.

>>43492736
1 in 3,377 browsers, using Chrome with chameleon installed. No need to block Javascript, so browsing isn't a pain in the ass.

https://github.com/ghostwords/chameleon

>>43489641
You spoof and change your useragent for that

>>43489512
>>43489866
>>43492562
>>43492600
hint: it's firefox

>>43492665
I just got that too~!

>>43493012
tell us which signature faget

>>43495213
>signature
agent, w/e

Had a custom installation of Firefox recently that got 1 in 777, was kinda freaky when it popped up, thought it was some mistake so I closed the browser (it's portable), made a copy of the folder, then restarted it, got 1 in 777 again so, now I use that.

I don't get it, is this good or bad?

according to their database, I'm unique.

lel

>>43496301
>>43496393
bad thing, easier target for the bogeyman

>>43496712
not really.

the database is probably full of "security conscious" individuals who do shit like spoof their useragent and black javashit. probably don't use homOSeX either.

this test is complete shit.

>>43484020
By using only default settings. Shit like noscript, adblock and any plugins will all raise the numbers.

>>43496884
The test is shit, but useful.
There are an absurd number of methods that can be used to uniquely identify a user out of a large stream of traffic.
Being "unique" among any number of users is perfectly acceptable. Being uniquely identified as any particular user is not.
For example, I could constantly change the fonts in my system, change time zones, useragents, system language and external IP address, disable HTML5 Canvas and WebGL, and I would be as unique as any other user but make it far less likely that any entity would be able to tie my identity to another user.

>>43497085
To reiterate, Panopticlick's goal is for the purpose of preventing tracking the visitation patterns of any particular user across the web, denying him his privacy.
However what I have stated is the method to denying any particular tracker my individual identity across the web, stretching to hundreds of potential identities that may or may not be myself, sustaining my anonymity.