←back to thread

348 points giuliomagnifico | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
ekjhgkejhgk ◴[] No.46244716[source]
OT on Tor:

Recently this link was on HN[1]. It ranks your browser on regular tracking and fingerprinting separately. "Tor without JS" was the only option I found to be completely fingerprint resistant. Even Tor "with JS on strict settings" ranked it as only "partly fingerprint resistant". (Interestingly firefox without JS never returns)

Scary stuff.

I'd like to hear other people's experiences/experiments here.

[1] https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/

replies(9): >>46244951 #>>46245164 #>>46245404 #>>46245460 #>>46245479 #>>46246168 #>>46246185 #>>46246384 #>>46248377 #
Santosh83 ◴[] No.46246185[source]
Visiting this site with a freshly installed, stock Tor browser (therefore with JS enabled, no settings changed from defaults) on Debian stable gives me:

"Our tests indicate that you have strong protection against Web tracking."

"Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 301.9 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 8.24 bits of identifying information."

Interestingly, increasing the Tor Browser Security level from Safe to Safer actually increased the bits of identifying information and reduced the anonymity:

"Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 832.32 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 9.7 bits of identifying information."

And at the Safest Security level (i.e. with JS diabled) the identifying bits and anonymization appear to be at their best:

"Within our dataset of several hundred thousand visitors tested in the past 45 days, only one in 261.41 browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.

Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys 8.03 bits of identifying information."

replies(1): >>46246360 #
1. ekjhgkejhgk ◴[] No.46246360[source]
I'm also on Debian 13 stable, that's definitely not what I get with JS. Weird.