From 3fe4867018b795a8589b637add1dde662e4a6fc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thorin-Oakenpants Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 11:54:36 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Updated 3.3 Overrides [To RFP or Not] (markdown) --- 3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not].md | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not].md b/3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not].md index 0d29fa3..5357127 100644 --- a/3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not].md +++ b/3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not].md @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ If your threat model calls for anonymity and advanced fingerprinting protection, --- -🟪 FINGERPRINTING +#### 🟪 FINGERPRINTING If you do nothing on desktop, you are already uniquely identifiable - screen, window and font metrics alone are probably enough - add timezone name, preferred languages, and several dozen other metrics and it is game over. [Here](https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss2017/ndss-2017-programme/cross-browser-fingerprinting-os-and-hardware-level-features/) is a link to the results of a study done in 2016 showing a **_99.24%_** unique hit rate (and that is excluding IP addresses). @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ Only Tor Browser can confidently address advanced scripts: enough metrics covere --- -🟪 ARKENFOX +#### 🟪 ARKENFOX **_Arkenfox does not and never has, claimed to defeat advanced fingerprinting_** and does not care if a couple of prefs change stable metrics, because **_you are already unique_** - see the preceding section. @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ So if a fingerprinting script should run, it would need to be universal or wides --- -🟪 RFP +#### 🟪 RFP Due to it's nature, which is effectively breaking web standards whilst protecting 100+ metrics, RFP does cause the odd issue.