[flagged]

Can you confirm that the title is correct and that it encrypts rather than hashes?

Both are concerns, but sending interpretable data is a more serious concern.

I scanned through the article and did not see an example of the header it added.

	▲	stingraycharles 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It says RSA public key encryption in the article, so I’m going to assume that it’s not a typo.

▲

phantomathkg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

can, but how? Have you verify all 6278 and what they do?

▲

cromka 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

sounds like you haven't heard of fingerprinting yet and how specific it is

	▲	yunwal 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Reversible encryption wouldn’t be required for fingerprinting. They’re doing something even more sinister here.

▲

kyleee 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And certainly fingerprint you right?

▲

flomo 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Probably mostly for abuse prevention. Lots of extensions like this one:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/linkedin-data...

	▲	hirako2000 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The "abuse" is that one doesn't have to copy paste for hours.

▲

WJW 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I guess that's what they're hoping for. With my admittedly biased opinion of the average linkedin user, about 99% will have the default set of extensions installed and so will not be very useful. Those users might have other identifiers of course, so who knows.

▲

jwpapi 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I’m pretty sure it’s not 99% you would wonder how many differences there are along with user-agent resolution and ip range...

I think 99% are identifiable

	▲	flomo 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ideally about 99% of LinkedIn users are using their professional name, occupation, and location.

▲

RobRivera 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh man time to see if there is a chrome Bonzai Buddy extension