Amidst the glossy marketing for VPN services, it can be tempting to believe that the moment you flick on the VPN connection you can browse the internet with full privacy. Unfortunately this is quite far from the truth, as interacting with internet services like websites leaves a significant fingerprint. In a study by [RTINGS.com] this browser fingerprinting was investigated in detail, showing just how easy it is to uniquely identify a visitor across the 83 laptops used in the study.

As summarized in the related video (also embedded below), the start of the study involved the Am I Unique? website which provides you with an overview of your browser fingerprint. With over 4.5 million fingerprints in their database as of writing, even using Edge on Windows 10 marks you as unique, which is telling.

    • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m here with multi-hop VPN with the first two hops staying in-country and the rest all random + a shit load of DNS blocking lists and browser extensions + blocking Google. I use different VPN providers too. I’m also introducing variable delays to my traffic to make NetFilter data less helpful.

      • hietsu@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Hops don’t matter at all against fingerprinting, which includes things like fonts you have installed, the os, os version number, browser version, extensions, some browser settings/flags, timezone, keyboard layout, your screen resolution, dpi, and what ever the crap the ”canvas” has stored. So pretty much no matter what you do, you’re unique.

        You can use some browsers that resist fingerprinting but guess what, those are so rarely used that again you shine like a beacon. I’m still yet to find an browser extension that would fake all my fingerprint parameters by setting them as what is the most common one in each category. So a Windows user running latest Chrome full screen on Fullhd monitor.

        And there is nothing stopping websites running the fingerprinting services and scripts on their own server, albeit most rely on third parties for convenience, and these at least can be blocked.

        • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Right, that’s why I mentioned all the blocking at the DNS and browser extension level — most fingerprinting is being done by third-parties — I generally don’t see first parties fingerprinting but if they do it’s likely a website I chose to be on rather than some shady <script> from God knows where.

          • hietsu@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Randomized = unique, unless it is done ”smartly” by setting some very very common combo. Or unless it randomizes for every page load (which I recon would mess up many site functions, window width/height for example). And if there is not that many users having this on you shine like a beacon again as ”that randomizer guy”.

              • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 hours ago

                I imagine it’s somewhere between what both of you are saying.

                I imagine “randomized” means a random common “fingerprint” (with parameters like user agent, language, etc) rather than just a unique set of randomized parameters (say, time zone in US but language set to Farsi which would be unique to an extent).

                • artyom@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 hours ago

                  I mean it doesn’t matter if it’s unique or not. What matters is that your fingerprint changes as you browse.

                  • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 hours ago

                    Sorry but that’s totally wrong.

                    The entire point is that if it’s unique it can be considered a fingerprint — in fact the entire reason it’s called “fingerprint” is that in theory it’s unique like a real fingerprint.

                    If it’s common then it’s unreliable as a fingerprint because it’s no longer unique. Therefore whether it’s unique or not is the entire point and relevant to the topic.

      • GreenShimada@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        Please understand that browser extensions make you more easy to track. I used to be under the same assumption, but uBO is as far as you should go. fingerprints include your extensions.

    • ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s the point. It doesn’t matter how many middle layers there are, if you’re using a web browser, there are hundreds of pieces of information that can still be used to uniquely identify you. Do you have WebGL enabled? If so, you could be identified with 100 constantly changing proxies.