undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjeroenhd25d ago0 comments

Even with resistFingerprinting, websites will be able to fingerprint you. There is no full immunity against fingerprinting.

Websites already break often with the strictest protections enabled, adding a "super duper strict protections" mode will just lead to bug reports. Even more-than-bare-basic tracking prevention has HN threads full of comments like "doesn't work on <Firefox fork>" because they don't see the connection between fingerprinting protection, WebRTC/WebGL/WebGPU, and websites not working.

People who are willing to take that bet can enable it in about:config.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

croes25d ago· 2 in thread

> Websites already break often with the strictest protections enabled, adding a "super duper strict protections" mode will just lead to bug reports.

That’s what I‘m saying. They already break because of other effects of the strict settings, so what is the benefit of leaving resistFingerprinting turn off?

> There is no full immunity against fingerprinting.

There is 0 immunity if you don’t even try.

Strict means, do what you can, not do somethings strict other not so strict and others ignore completely.

Don’t call it strict if it isn’t strict

jeroenhdOP25d ago

The description in Firefox state:

> Stronger protections that block more trackers, but may cause some sites to break.

That seems very reasonable to me. Anyone who wants more than that can turn on resistFingerprinting and live with the consequences.

croes25d ago

> Stronger protections that block more trackers, but may cause some sites to break.

People already expect sites to break, so why holding back?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse