Re: [gentoo-user] Google privacy changes

[Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Frank Steinmetzger <Warp_7@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 09:34:56AM -0500, Michael Mol wrote:
>
>> >>> I guess you mean https://panopticlick.eff.org/
>> >>
>> >> My results from work:
>> >>
>> >> Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,939,102 tested so far.
>> >>
>> >> Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that
>> >> conveys at least 20.89 bits of identifying information.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Funny, I get exactly the same thing except add one to the large number.
>> >  I guess you tested before I did.  How does one avoid this but still
>> > have sites work?
>>
>> Well, I just went to the same site using a Chrome 'incognito' browser,
>> and got this:
>>
>>    Within our dataset of several million visitors, only one in 969,560
>> browsers have the same fingerprint as yours.
>>
>>    Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that
>> conveys 19.89 bits of identifying information.
>
> I get almost the same numbers with just using NoScript and Flashblock. (And
> the above result when I allow the Java applet and JavaScript).
>
> This backs me up in using noscript and flashblock. Sometimes I doubt myself
> when I get asked once more why I would use NoScript in times when most of the
> web relies on JS. I then say that privacy and comfort is more important to me
> than having to allow JS on a site from time to time. (Even though some sites
> obviously don't work without it, such as video portals, most of them still do,
> albeit some gt a borked layout from it).

FWIW, I'm not using NoScript or Flashblock, only an Adblock. And
Chrome blocked the Java applet both in the normal and incognito modes.


-- 
:wq