Re: [tor-talk] panopticlick data

[Nicolas Vigier <boklm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 01 Oct 2013, Joe Btfsplk wrote:

> On 10/1/2013 12:48 AM, Andreas Krey wrote:
> >On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 21:08:58 +0000, Joe Btfsplk wrote:
> >...
> >>No cookies are set, so that doesn't affect outcome.  In fact, the "bits
> >>of identifying information" shown in results chart largely remain
> >>identical (except screen size sometimes changes), but their estimate of
> >>"One in X browsers have the  same fingerprint as yours," keeps going
> >>down dramatically - each time I re run the test.
> >How do you expect them to identify repeat visitors as opposed to
> >counting them as separate incarnations, thus lowering the uniqueness?
> >
> Not sure I understand the question in this context.  Without
> cookies, I don't expect them to identify repeat visitors.  I read
> their full paper on how they use the data collected
> https://panopticlick.eff.org/browser-uniqueness.pdf
> 
> Me visiting 2 - 4 more times, or even the other site visitors - *in
> the same 2 - 4 min. span*, wouldn't (actually) affect the statistics
> & lower their reported uniqueness estimate by factors of 2, 3 or
> more.
> 
> Repeating the test 4 times, almost immediately (clearing cache
> between), out of an existing data base of millions of other site
> visitors, wouldn't lower my uniqueness from 1 in 1.7 million, then
> to 1 in 700,000, to 1 in 500,000.

1st visit: 3 444 000
2nd visit: 3 444 000 / 2 = 1 722 000
3rd visit: 3 444 000 / 3 = 1 148 000
4th visit: 3 444 000 / 4 = 861 000
5th visit: 3 444 000 / 5 = 688 800
6th visit: 3 444 000 / 6 = 574 000
etc ...

-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsusbscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk