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.

  • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.chEnglish
    4·
    12 days ago

    I’m here with multi-hop VPN with the first two hops staying in-country and the rest all random + a shit load of DNS blocking lists and browser extensions + blocking Google. I use different VPN providers too. I’m also introducing variable delays to my traffic to make NetFilter data less helpful.

    • GreenShimada@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      12 days ago

      Please understand that browser extensions make you more easy to track. I used to be under the same assumption, but uBO is as far as you should go. fingerprints include your extensions.

            • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.chEnglish
              21·
              11 days 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·
                11 days 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·
                  11 days 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·
                    11 days 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.

      • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.chEnglish
        1·
        11 days ago

        Right, that’s why I mentioned all the blocking at the DNS and browser extension level — most fingerprinting is being done by third-parties — I generally don’t see first parties fingerprinting but if they do it’s likely a website I chose to be on rather than some shady <script> from God knows where.