• Rez@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    But isn’t randomization supposed to give you a different unique fingerprint each time? So yes, you would be unique and easily tracked but only until your fingerprint changes

      • virtualbriefcase@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think there is any proven results, but I think the reason the EFF prefers Braves decision is the philosophy that there are so many data points that it could be possible to link you to it using the ones not standardized by anti fingerprinting.

        Like ways to incorrectly describe someone. One describes a guy correctly but generically. One describes a guy with a lot of detail but the wrong race and two feet too short.

    • somedaysoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, you’re partially right, but randomized doesn’t necessarily mean unique either. I mean, sure you could randomize for uniqueness, but you can also randomize for anonymity. So I would say that part is also wrong but somehow it still gets the upvotes because it sounds good I guess?