The EFF site is great, it tells you how many bits of information are identifiable.

If you think you have good protection, go to http://fingerprint.com and see if they can track you across multiple visits. This is a commercial fingerprinting company, on their homepage they have a tracking widget to demonstrate how good they are. So it's always useful to use fingerprint.com to get an empirical test of if you're trackable.

I have been doing fingerprint research for several years. I've done countless builds with various browsers, configurations, extensions, and strategies. (Yes i have too much time for this).

Here is what I've concluded. I hope this helps someone.

CoverYourTrack is crap, plain and simple. Your best option will always be to randomize. Always. You will not "blend in". I don't care if you run Google Chrome on Windows 10 or Safari on iOS, JavaScript exposes way too much info, you will always have a unique fingeprint. Just go play around with fingerprint.com on some normie browser/os setups and you will see what i mean.

You must randomize all the values that you see on sites like browserleaks.com. canvas, audio context, webgl hash, clientrects, fonts, etc etc. I'd also make sure you are proxifying all your browsers and using random locations. You can do this with Brave somewhat, which has some randomization stuff in it. You can do this with browser extensions as well. Ungoogled chromium also has some randomization for canvas and clientrects i think

There are only a couple options outside of this that I recommend, in the realm of "generic fingerprint" solutions. TOR browser (they have been on the front lines of this for many years). And also Mullvad browser, which, despite its generic fingerprint goal, seems to also defeat fingerprint.com.

Tldr, if you want the best experience out of the box that is also very usable, just use Mullvad Browser. They are basically the browser i wished for for like a decade.

My impression is the thing with modern day ad tracking, selling information to spammers, and hackers is, even if you secure your browser tighter than a drum, any one of your browser extensions, which we've given permission to read all site data on every site you visit and interact with, could be keeping extensive logs on your activity and selling that away to the highest bidder. Am I understanding that right?

I've got really good scores. I'm grading a bit on a curve due to mitigations/spoofs already in place for both browsers that fool the scripts effectively.

4.45 bits from Firefox. ["System Fonts" is the worst score]

4.47 bits from LibreWolf. ["AudioContext Fingerprint" is the worst score

Our tests indicate that you have strong protection against Web tracking.

nice

OS: Ubuntu 23.10 | Browser: Firefox 119 | Add-on: No-Script | Misc: AdGuardHome on Raspberry Pi 4B

Edit: Uploaded Full image for Comparison with Mullvad Browser.

Here's my result (Tested on Safari on iPad)

Anyone know how I can get improved fingerprinting results on Firefox Android? Currently its at 16.56 bits and it says I have strong protection against web tracking. NoCanvas isn't availble on Android devices.

I personally consider this[1] to be the ultimate test of Browser fingerprint protection coverage. [1] https://abrahamjuliot.github.io/creepjs/

This is another good website for Browser leak/privacy settings test.

https://browserleaks.com/

~~Using Firefox on iPhone~~

edit: Nvm previous result, I got the same result OP did with Firefox and Safari, I realized I was testing on my wifi with a pihole… switched to mobile network only and protection dropped to partial.

edit2: but Firefox Focus still has strong protection:

I got the same as @mintycactus@lemmy.world using Firefox Focus on IOS. Which I’m rather pleased by

I've been using this for years m8. Propa bit of software

My Librewolf gets strong protection from tracking and it's fingerprint is common with millions (so not uniquely identifiable).

Meh, "Protecting you from fingerprinting?" doesn't load.