Privacy

43957 readers

293 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

If I keep js disabled and then use extension will it still be a fingerprinting issue? (feddit.fr)

submitted 3 weeks ago by url@feddit.fr to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I mean for fingerprinting protections I go minimal with extensions. I only have Ublock origin. I want to keep dark reader but for fingerprinting issue I'm not doing it. So if I keep js disabled with Ublock origin (I'm doing it for a while now) and then install dark reader will websites still be able to tell that I have dark reader installed?

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This could be a fingerprint as very few people keep JS off and you might stand out.

On the other hand, the browser gives out very little information without JS active. Turn off JS and test your browser on deviceinfo, amiunique, etc and see how many entries are "unknown".

[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

True, but JS off also makes the web so Mich faster and in many cases less annoying. More so if uBlock is used on Medium mode.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

I can not disagree with any of your points.

[–] anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I played around with https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ and realized that I'm quite unique whether I allow js or not. Many trackers get blocked by the absence of js though so that would hamper them somewhat.
My Sony phone with 21:9 screen ensures I'm uncommon compared to most.

My goal isn't to be untrackable but to block the ads they try to shove in your face as step 2.

[–] SteakSneak@retrolemmy.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

If it makes you feel better I have a Sony with 21:9 too. So there's at least two of us😅

[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I use IronFox and I do pass that test. Only browser that I use that does. FF and Cromite do not.

[–] anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago

Interesting, it seems that while IronFox has the protections activated by default (and with some changes) you can also activate most of them on Firefox.
https://github.com/ironfox-oss/IronFox/blob/dev/docs/Features.md#fingerprinting

Ironfox Devs themselves say that the only browser that can truly protect you against fingerprinting is the Tor Browser.
https://github.com/ironfox-oss/IronFox/blob/dev/docs/Limitations.md

Do you feel IronFox breaks many sites for you?

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago

Would be nice if there was an extension that hid itself and other extensions for sites, that you visit.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Disabling JS is itself a very rare thing for someone to do so doing it helps fingerprint you.

[–] zdhzm2pgp@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

I always wondered . . . is it sort of like driving without a license plate?