[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-talk] panopticlick data
On 9/30/2013 6:14 PM, Joe Btfsplk wrote:
Info given on panopticlick.eff.org is a bit confusing in that some of
it seems incorrect. If that makes a browser "more common," I guess
it's a good thing.
But some of the info it shows as incorrect is very "uncommon." That
doesn't mean someone trying to finger print a browser would get the
same info that Panopticlick shows - or does it?
There's something quite odd about the EFF / Panopticlick browser
fingerprinting site. All (I) have to do to drastically lower the
uniqueness of my browser, is revisit the site several time, clearing
cache between visits.
It showed an incorrect screen size and "color depth." Claiming in 1
in 430370 browsers (systems?) have that specific characteristic -
fairly uncommon. Except monitor info is incorrect.
All that resulted in a claim that "only *one in 1,721,479 browsers
have the same fingerprint*."
I don't know where / how it gets the screen size, but mine definitely
isn't 947 wide. It's actually a very common size.
I assume the color depth is bit value. Panopticlick shows 24 (bit?),
but there's not even a CHOICE of 24 bit in my display settings, for my
monitor / graphics card combination. Maybe I misunderstand how
Panopticlick arrives at that value.
It surprised me that it estimated 1 in 76 browsers had the USERAGENT
data given by TBB, of Windows 7 w/ Fx 17. Other than possibly mostly
TBB users going to Panopticlick (skewing the data) to check browser
uniqueness, I doubt 1 in every 76 users in the U.S. or world wide,
truly have Fx 17 in Windows 7. Maybe I'm wrong.
I just wondered if others have checked their regular Firefox & TBB
uniqueness on eff's site, to see if the data shown seems accurate for
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.
There's something wrong w/ their "result analysis." Same browser,
showing same bits of identifying data, can't go from uniqueness of 1 in
3 mil, to 1 in 1.7 mil, to 1 in 700 K, to 1 in 500 K, when nothing's
changed in the parameters that it is recording to arrive at the analysis.
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsusbscribe or change other settings go to