17
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2024
17 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1562 readers
154 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
now i wonder how much of that is blocked by firefox enhanced tracking protection. not all, of course, and it's probably much more than needed for unique identifier. there's mozilla security blog post on this topic says that some anti-fingerprinting measures were built in all the way back in 2020 (firefox 72)
Above I listed a bunch of things which would help narrow down browser version, but that's hopeless anyway -- an adversary will probably be able to figure out your rough browser version even if you fake the UA string, and that you're running in anti-fingerprinting mode.
So assuming that's out of scope I think these are probably the big categories:
That said while I've worked with browsers, I'm not in the biz of fingerprinting or anti-fingerprinting, so there's surely stuff I haven't thought of.
* Actually we should probably just disable non-HTTPS entirely...
** Running under a VM is probably the minimum required to mitigate the chances of cutting-edge side-channel timing attacks from James Bond level adversaries, but at that point maybe you just want a dedicated browsing computer heh. I did chuckle at the idea of someone trying to apply cryptographic constant-time algorithm techniques to writing a browser though.