Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Take the test here: https://panopticlick.eff.org/??

Read the paper here: https://panopticlick.eff.org/browser-uniqueness.pdf

Criminy, I thought I was being smart running a boatload of privacy plugins, setting my browser up not to run scripts, accept cookies, nor generally, to give out much information at all about me or my computer.

But now, it turns out, that can be used against me; i.e., my computer is totally unique amongst 1.5 million browsers tested, and therefore, can be tracked across the web based upon this unique fingerprint! Or, as one wag has said, "What a cruel twist of fate, all my plugins designed to give me privacy are being used to identify me!"

1 posted on 06/04/2011 6:29:54 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: LibWhacker

They can also track you by IP and location.


2 posted on 06/04/2011 6:35:28 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
"Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,592,818 tested so far."

That's a problem.

4 posted on 06/04/2011 6:39:20 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
You can browse but you can't hide.
5 posted on 06/04/2011 6:39:40 PM PDT by JPG (Sarah Palin, driving the MSM crazy one day at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Same with me, except I had to allow their program to send data back.


6 posted on 06/04/2011 6:41:04 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Mine to seems to be completely unique among the 1.56 million in their database.

So what are the odds that we BOTH have such unique settings?

One thing making mine unique was that I have Java plugins- but who does not?

I think these guys are BUILDING a database of browser characteristics, to use to track people.


7 posted on 06/04/2011 6:42:05 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker; hiredhand; CodeToad; Swordmaker

In theory that makes sense.... Could indeed be a tell tale.

I do such to avoid the average bs malware etc...


8 posted on 06/04/2011 6:45:15 PM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan to kill everyone you meet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Now you need another plugin to protect all this info ...


9 posted on 06/04/2011 6:46:38 PM PDT by MetaThought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
Photobucket
10 posted on 06/04/2011 6:46:46 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Buy a used computer trade-in from a repair shop. It usually has the original buyer`s administrator`s login defaults locked in and defaults to the original buyer`s email address and windows license info. All the upgrades are registered with the administrator.


19 posted on 06/04/2011 7:05:14 PM PDT by bunkerhill7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
Weird.

Here's an easier way of tracking someone - the only way to defeat it is through an anonymizer portal:

Here's what I got:

Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 5,628 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 12.46 bits of identifying information.

20 posted on 06/04/2011 7:05:44 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

I got the same result as everyone else.

Also, an icon which I’ve never seen before on my computer showed up down in the lower right hand corner of the screen, next to the antivirus icon. Something to do with Java.


21 posted on 06/04/2011 7:10:15 PM PDT by IAMIUBU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Interesting; it seems that the two attributes - at least for the three browsers that I regularly use (FF4, Opera 11, IE9) - that are the most unique are (1) the browser plugin details that are sent in the HTTP headers, and (2) the number of system fonts sent in the HTTP headers.

Other than that, the user-agent string is the next most unique attribute, but it differs among the three; for FF4 it’s not that rare (guess that means a lot of folks switched to FF4 pretty quickly), for Opera it’s a more unique attribute - probably because a lot fewer people use Opera, and for IE9 it’s a very unique attribute, most likely because IE9 is so new and because IE users tend to be slower at upgrading - particularly enterprise users - than FF users or Opera users.

I think I might explore how to stop the browsers from sending out so much info on things that are relatively irrelevant, like system fonts.


29 posted on 06/04/2011 7:28:18 PM PDT by Oceander (The phrase "good enough for government work" is not meant as a compliment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,597,433 tested so far.
Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 20.61 bits of identifying information.

I have no idea what the heck this means.

37 posted on 06/04/2011 9:02:52 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito Ergo Conservitus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

One in 320,000 with scrips off, one in 1.598 Million (unique) with scrips enabled for the Panopticlick site only. Panopticlick kept feeding me suspicious scripts, the latest Java release was going wild with detections.


38 posted on 06/04/2011 9:38:20 PM PDT by Iris7 ("Do not live lies!" ...Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

Interesting, and from the look of it, pretty accurate.

One thing, though...

Using Google Chrome, I get the 1 in 1.5+ million

Using Microsoft IE 9, I get the 1 in 1.5+ million.

Using Firefox with noscript and AdBlock Plus, I get 1 in 17000.

Looks like I’m going back to my locked-down Firefox install.


40 posted on 06/04/2011 10:06:32 PM PDT by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
There is something seriously not right about this test. The first time I ran the test, this was my result:
Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 533,751 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 19.03 bits of identifying information.

After taking the test several times, my score gets lower with each test.

This is the latest result:

Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 43,285 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 15.4 bits of identifying information.

Either their test is hinky or my browser (Opera) is shutting down identifying characteristics.
47 posted on 06/05/2011 1:00:09 AM PDT by jellybean (Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
Take the test here: https://panopticlick.eff.org/??

Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,607,432 tested so far.
Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 20.62 bits of identifying information.

56 posted on 06/05/2011 11:22:57 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker

WOW! Uniquely identifiable as the only one out of 1.6 million tested!

I have plugins for my Wacom tablet, for Silverlight, Flash, and a bunch of nice fonts I’ve got installed.

Quite an eye-opener!

Ed


61 posted on 06/05/2011 12:09:59 PM PDT by Sir_Ed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

Sorry for the delay on this one--I was busy this weekend :)

62 posted on 06/06/2011 5:27:52 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LibWhacker
Interesting.

I originally ran the test with my NoScript turned on, and it returned a 1 in ~600,000. When I turned it off, I was 1 in 1.6M.

64 posted on 06/06/2011 5:32:38 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson