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 quit…

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.

    • hietsu@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      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.chEnglish
          21·
          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.socialEnglish
            12·
            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.chEnglish
              21·
              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.

              • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
                11·
                3 hours ago

                Sorry, but that’s totally wrong.

                Imagine if you changed your literal fingerprint. No one would be able to trace it back to you.

                Likewise, if your fingerprint changes as you browse, those activities can no longer be linked together, because you no longer have a “fingerprint” at all.