| ▲ | j45 6 hours ago |
| Ad blockers focus on ads, not fingerprinting. |
|
| ▲ | ronjouch 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| "Ad blockers" nowadays do much more. From the horse’s mouth, which describes itself as a “wide-spectrum content blocker” [1]: “uBlock Origin (uBO) is a CPU and memory-efficient wide-spectrum content blocker for Chromium and Firefox. It blocks ads, trackers, coin miners, popups, annoying anti-blockers, malware sites, etc., by default using EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter Lowe's Blocklist, Online Malicious URL Blocklist, and uBO filter lists. There are many other lists available to block even more [...] Ads, "unintrusive" or not, are just the visible portion of the privacy-invading means entering your browser when you visit most sites. uBO's primary goal is to help users neutralize these privacy-invading methods in a way that welcomes those users who do not wish to use more technical means.” [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock?tab=readme-ov-file#ublock-... |
| |
| ▲ | newsoftheday 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd like to install uBlock Origin, when I try, Chrome warns it needs the permission to, "Read and change all your data on all websites". That seems excessive, to give that much power to one extension. I currently use no extensions to keep my security posture high. | | | |
| ▲ | j45 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Appreciate the clarification, I would clarify to say the origin story of Ad blockers are ads, and the underlying behaviours may not capture everything that fingerprinting may do where people don't advertise. Ublock is great, but I am finding fingerprinting that gets past it and that's what I'm referring to. |
|
|
| ▲ | autoexec 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Disable JS and you've eliminated the vast majority of fingerprinting (besides "blocks JS") |
| |
| ▲ | j45 an hour ago | parent [-] | | alternatively, css can script quite a bit... :) | | |
|
|
| ▲ | mewmewblobcat 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Depends on what lists you use. If you use uBlock Origin, and enable most of the lists, it'll target both. |
| |
| ▲ | dcdc123 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I use uBlock Origin with basically every filter list enabled on Brave with their default blocker enabled. I just confirmed that this does not prevent the script from loading and scanning extensions. The browser tools network tab on LinkedIn is absolutely frightening. | | |
| ▲ | autoexec 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | NoScript will prevent that script from loading and scanning extensions. JS is required for almost all fingerprinting and malware spread via websites. Keeping it disabled, at least by default, is the best thing you can do to protect yourself. |
| |
| ▲ | big_toast 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | According to the EFF fingerprinting website, Firefox + uBlock Origin didn't really make my browser particularly unique. But turning on privacy.resistfingerprinting in about:config (or was it fingerprintingProtection?) would break things randomly (like 3D maps on google for me. maybe it's related to canvas API stuff?) and made it hard to remember why things weren't working. Not really sure how to strike a balance of broad convenience vs effectiveness these days. Every additional hoop is more attrition. | |
| ▲ | Scoundreller 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Every time you open LinkedIn in a Chrome-based browser I thought uBlock Origin was now dead in Chrome? I remember a few hacks to keep it going but have now migrated to Firefox (or sometimes Edge…) to keep using it. | | |
| ▲ | ronjouch 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Full uBlock Origin is dead in Chrome, yes, but https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home is the next best thing if you cannot leave Chrome | | |
| ▲ | idbnstra 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | or Vivaldi is chrome based, and it supports full uBlock Origin. If you don't need CHROME chrome, that's even better imo |
| |
| ▲ | qilo 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Surprisingly full uBO still works on Chrome 146 if launched with the argument --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported
|
| |
| ▲ | j45 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Go try it with fingerprint.com. Even post-sanitization, pi-hole, you name it, it will be surprising. | | |
| ▲ | streetfighter64 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | fingerprint.com seems to be some fingerprinting vendor, they don't even offer a demo without logging in. https://coveryourtracks.eff.org is EFFs demo site is non-profit and doesn't require login | | |
| ▲ | Fogest 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I have a lot of browser extensions running and am using Brave as my browser. I have their built in adblocker enabled as well as some of their privacy features turned on in the settings. I am also using a self hosted adblock instance for my DNS servers. I actually appear as random and not unique which is really nice to see. I know Brave does intentionally lean on some of the privacy side of things and it also has options to specifically prevent sites from fingerprinting by blocking things like seeing language preferences. I have to assume it is also doing some things in the backend to try and prevent other fingerprinting methods. | |
| ▲ | KeshiaRose 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is the Fingerprint demo page (the page itself is a demo): https://fingerprint.com/demo There's also https://demo.fingerprint.com for use case specific demos and more detail on the API response. | |
| ▲ | iso1631 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | coveryoutracks always tells me I'm unique Which is concerning. Until you realise I do the same thing a few days later and I'm still unique. | | |
| ▲ | mrguyorama 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It tells you that you have a unique fingerprint. It is not telling you that the test site has never seen you before, because the eff isn't storing your fingerprint for later analysis and tracking It could actually tell you about which real tracking vendors are showing you as "Seen and tracked" so it's pretty annoying they don't do that. If that site shows you as having a unique fingerprint, I guarantee you are being tracked across the web. I've seen the actual systems in usage, not the sales pitch. I've seen how effective these tools are, and I haven't even gotten a look at what Google or Facebook have internally. Even no name vendors that don't own the internet can easily track you across any site that integrates with them. The fingerprint is just a set of signals that tracking providers are using to follow you across the internet. It's per machine for the most part, but if you have ever purchased something on the internet, some of the providers involved will have information like your name. Here is what Google asks ecommerce platforms to send them as part of a Fraud Prevention integration using Recaptcha: https://docs.cloud.google.com/recaptcha/docs/reference/rest/... | | |
| ▲ | iso1631 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It must store the fingerprints to determine if I'm unique, otherwise everyone would be unique. If it doesn't store the fingerprints then how does it tell the difference between 5 identical looking browsers connecting from 5 different IPs 1 browser connecting 5 times from 5 different IPs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | throwawayq3423 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| https://brave.com/privacy-updates/28-sunsetting-strict-finge... |
