They are proud, they can extract that much information. Yes, this is bad. BUT, if you consider, that much of this information is unstable (think of installing a new font), the fingerprinting gets more complicated and you need some machine learning to extract the relevant data and/or match changed fingerprints, to correlate them to the same user. This is possible, but then a fingerprint is not an 100% unique thing, even when panopticlick believes it, because matching two slightly changed fingerprints lowers the chance of having the same user from 100% to 99% or something. And the more the fingerprint changes, the wore the result will be.
So, maybe the best option is, to randomize many of these values on browser start.
hosting you own tracking isn't bad at all. You know what i'm doing at your site, anyway. Because you have the httpd-logs. But services like google analytics provide the page owner very limited information, but have themself detailed information where the user was, because many many sites are using it, and it can track the user across all these sites.
The most annoying problem: Firefox caches redirects. You cannot easily clear the cache, and it will redirect you, even when the url does not redirect anymore.
Of course, you could use cache times and checking which images were loaded to store information as well. But one image has 1 bit of information, while one single e-tag (i.e. on one imagE) has many bits.
github can put it in its ToS: if you do not specify a license, your code will be published as public domain. You therefore give github the right to grant anybody any rights on your code. You can avoid this, by explicitly adding a license to your code.
so, which one do you trust? And how do you authenticate sites, which are only signed by untrusted CAs?
The whole CA system is broken, because there is no real trustpath to the site. Do you even know, if your download of firefox was clean, or if a MITM inserted some bad CA, which is not part of the default firefox?
This is exactly the behaviour, i want to have. I know how Wikipedia Titles are written, sometimes they have a redirect, and if i really not find the article, i am at least on the wikipedia-site and can use the searchfield there. But most the time i can avoid clicking on search results / following a redirect first.
it may be a good idea anyway, to seperate processes where you are non-anonymous because of entering your details/using a login for an account with your details from your private browsing anyway. If you login to some bank account, you can use your dsl ip as well, because you will not be anonymous anyway. And you may want to seperate it, because from the moment you logged in, someone knows which vpn ip belongs to you, until you disconnect and change the ip.
who needs such plugins? I did not install it either, just as i do not install stupid toolbars. Some people may want it, but noone is required to use it.
if you search for something, you may want to have web-results and wikipedia. When DDG displays you an excerpt from Wikipedia (like a Definition of your term), it may be enough, so you do not need to open wikipedia, but read it just before reading the rest of the search results.
Mir IS a competitor, as i said in my posting. But it is not Xorg/Mir vs Wayland, but Xorg/Wayland vs. Mir. Wayland will be a successor of Xorg, while Mir is a totally different Project. Of course, Wayland is no X11+1, but a different project, too. But the developers now seem to agree, that Wayland is a good software to replace X11, while Mir is Ubuntu's NIH-Project.
Slashdot Mirror
yes and no.
They are proud, they can extract that much information. Yes, this is bad. BUT, if you consider, that much of this information is unstable (think of installing a new font), the fingerprinting gets more complicated and you need some machine learning to extract the relevant data and/or match changed fingerprints, to correlate them to the same user. This is possible, but then a fingerprint is not an 100% unique thing, even when panopticlick believes it, because matching two slightly changed fingerprints lowers the chance of having the same user from 100% to 99% or something. And the more the fingerprint changes, the wore the result will be.
So, maybe the best option is, to randomize many of these values on browser start.
hosting you own tracking isn't bad at all. You know what i'm doing at your site, anyway. Because you have the httpd-logs. But services like google analytics provide the page owner very limited information, but have themself detailed information where the user was, because many many sites are using it, and it can track the user across all these sites.
The most annoying problem: Firefox caches redirects. You cannot easily clear the cache, and it will redirect you, even when the url does not redirect anymore.
Of course, you could use cache times and checking which images were loaded to store information as well. But one image has 1 bit of information, while one single e-tag (i.e. on one imagE) has many bits.
My Blogpost in 2007 (sorry, its german):
http://blog.laxu.de/2007/09/23/browser-raten-und-e-tag-cookies/
Does vim count as "modern IDE", because it has autocomplete?
github can put it in its ToS: if you do not specify a license, your code will be published as public domain. You therefore give github the right to grant anybody any rights on your code. You can avoid this, by explicitly adding a license to your code.
Default License: WTFPL
effect: Just the same as public domain, but with a license.
not if you use the kd=off setting or use the preferences panel to disable it.
okay, now you justed outed yourself, that you're just a troll.
so, which one do you trust? And how do you authenticate sites, which are only signed by untrusted CAs?
The whole CA system is broken, because there is no real trustpath to the site. Do you even know, if your download of firefox was clean, or if a MITM inserted some bad CA, which is not part of the default firefox?
rightclick on the searchfield after searching with for example kd=off, then click "add search engine" when you're using firefox.
yeah, you're having some point there ... but on the other hand, count the evil google extensions ...
This is exactly the behaviour, i want to have. I know how Wikipedia Titles are written, sometimes they have a redirect, and if i really not find the article, i am at least on the wikipedia-site and can use the searchfield there. But most the time i can avoid clicking on search results / following a redirect first.
sweden, ukraine
the vpn provider does not log (and keeps this promise), you encrypt your traffic. Noone will be able to identify you or read your traffic.
it may be a good idea anyway, to seperate processes where you are non-anonymous because of entering your details/using a login for an account with your details from your private browsing anyway. If you login to some bank account, you can use your dsl ip as well, because you will not be anonymous anyway. And you may want to seperate it, because from the moment you logged in, someone knows which vpn ip belongs to you, until you disconnect and change the ip.
yeah, because everyone in the foreign country is supervised.
Maybe you're in your own american filter bubble, looking down at the rest of the world?
just use
?kd=off&q=%s
instead of
?q=%s
> 3)
do not trust https. The NSA will have the power to sign certificates on at least one CA which is in all browsers.
who needs such plugins? I did not install it either, just as i do not install stupid toolbars. Some people may want it, but noone is required to use it.
why the Special Search? Its just one page more ... try using:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%25s
if you search for something, you may want to have web-results and wikipedia. When DDG displays you an excerpt from Wikipedia (like a Definition of your term), it may be enough, so you do not need to open wikipedia, but read it just before reading the rest of the search results.
because you're not understanding the posting.
Mir IS a competitor, as i said in my posting. But it is not Xorg/Mir vs Wayland, but Xorg/Wayland vs. Mir. Wayland will be a successor of Xorg, while Mir is a totally different Project. Of course, Wayland is no X11+1, but a different project, too. But the developers now seem to agree, that Wayland is a good software to replace X11, while Mir is Ubuntu's NIH-Project.
any further questions?