An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#43776 - 02/27/17 08:17 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Artie, libraries are good, but very few. Cafes are all over.

What is NO (-0-) protection ?

Top
#43781 - 02/27/17 08:58 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: kevs
Artie, libraries are good, but very few. Cafes are all over.

What is NO (-0-) protection ?

So the cafes don't have rental computers any more, and there aren't enough libraries to allow you to complete your project?

You said that you "tweaked the settings to be a private as possible, and still they fared no better than, nearly unique".

You don't want your Mac to be unique, because that's how the bad guys identify it as the same computer each time regardless of your privacy settings, so I'm suggesting that if you leave your settings "wide open", i.e. with NO protection enabled, it will become more generic and "nearly unique" may turn to something less identifiable, "one of millions", hopefully.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#43783 - 02/27/17 09:08 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
I think you have it backwards Artie.

Unique is worse than nearly unique.

If it's unique, you are more identifiable than nearly unique.

Has anyone see any other result than those 2! I have not.

Top
#43784 - 02/27/17 09:11 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: kevs
I think you have it backwards Artie.

Unique is worse than nearly unique.

If it's unique, you are more identifiable than nearly unique.

Has anyone see any other result than those 2! I have not.

Got it straight, kevs; I said "You don't want your Mac to be unique....", and turning your privacy settings off will make it less "nearly unique" than it is now.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#43785 - 02/27/17 09:16 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
Am I that far out of the loop?

Aren't there still places where you can walk in and rent a computer by the hour, and don't libraries have computers for those in need any more?

I live in the 16th largest city in the United States and internet cafes with computers you could use were never that popular in this neck of the woods, but now that so many venues offer free WiFi the few that did exist have either closed or given up their computers and customers bring their own laptops, tablets, and smart phones. The only places I know that offer computers for their customers to use on the internet are high end auto dealership service waiting rooms (and those are phasing out the computers in favor of carrels where you can use your own device in private), a high end car wash, and public libraries (my nephew, the head of a rather large city library system, tells me their computers are primarily used to access the online card catalog but people do drop in the take advantage of their free WiFi).
Originally Posted By: artie505
Have cell phones done that much damage?

Damage??? confused

If you insist on assessing blame, it isn't the CELL phone that is to blame it would be the SMARTphone and free WiFi used by a variety of businesses to attract customers with minimal investment.

I do volunteer work with the homeless, with refugees, and underprivileged and fifteen to twenty years ago a pager (remember pagers?) was an essential tool for getting a job and for survival beyond bare existence, five to ten years ago the pager had evolved to a cell phone, and today it is a smart phone. I have known homeless to forego a meal in order to pay for data services.

School districts are more and more often issuing tablets to every student and installing MiFi towers in public and private apartment complexes catering to low income families. Those tablets are required for the students to get their assignments, do their school work, as well as communication between the teachers and parents.

To me that is not damage, it is EVOLUTION. Whether you are in or out of the loop seems to me a personal choice and neither right or wrong, it is your choice.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#43810 - 02/28/17 03:37 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
tacit Offline


Registered: 08/03/09
Loc: Portland, Oregon, USA
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Tacit may have something to offer on this but from the article you cited it appears that at this time there is no way of hiding your digital signature from this technique as It is based upon detectable/harvestable hardware and software information. That does not identify you specifically, it identifies your computer. So anyone using your computer is you. This appears to have nothing to do with cookies or cache files which means Private Browsing would be ineffectual.


Yes, that's exactly correct.

I just checked my browser's digital signature via Panopticlick with private browsing on and off. I was easily identified both ways.

Ditto for using a VPN; I have private VPNs set up in Portland and Vancouver, and again, my browser fingerprint could be identified.

Private browsing protects you from someone else sitting at your computer and seeing what you've been up to. It does not in any way prevent a sufficiently skilled server owner from fingerprinting your computer.
_________________________
Photo gallery, all about me, and more: www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Top
#43812 - 02/28/17 06:04 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: tacit]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Thanks Tacit
I'll been testing Panopticlick, and I got some browsers to go from having a digital fingerprint to nearly having one, which I assume is better!

But I have not see it better than nearly having, even with brand new browsers I downloaded with a total clean slate (and doing a quick tweak on settings).

Have you or anyone else seen a better score than "nearly unique"?

Top
#43813 - 02/28/17 06:13 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Don't forget that part (much?) of your "fingerprint" is hardware/software related; it's not limited to your browser settings.

Edit: Have you tried Safari > Develop > Disable Extensions to see if your Panopticlick results change?


Edited by artie505 (03/01/17 12:50 AM)
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#43993 - 03/15/17 10:15 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Update, this Chrome extension claims to create a (not) unique fingerprint, but I tested it in panopticlick and it did not. Maybe someone else can give it a whirl and let me know if you succeed?

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rubberglove/koabfojebhfdjnligkcihoeekimoekpg

Top
#44003 - 03/16/17 04:16 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
I checked out TOR (originally a Defense Advanced Projects Agency project) and according to Panopticlick when taken together with Badger (which installs from the Panopticlick site) it provides partial protection of the fingerprint at the medium level of protection and full fingerprint protection at the maximum level. The downside of all this is with medium level protection there are web sites that either will not work or will work only when specific permissions are given. At the top protection level a LOT of web sites will not work because so much functionality is turned off.

It routes through the TOR network and for example the routing to reach FineTunedMac is going from my browser to France, thence to the Netherlands, then to another Netherlands site, and finally to the internet. All that international routing does make it a touch slower. There are too many other security features to go into here, but if you are security conscious it is worth a look.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#44004 - 03/16/17 05:01 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Joe, have you or anyone seen Panopticlick give a verdict of anything other than unique or near unique fingerprint? I haven't.

This plug claims to achieve that, but I tested it to no avail:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rubberglove/koabfojebhfdjnligkcihoeekimoekpg

Only thing so far I've stumbled upon that talks about achieving that.

Top
#44005 - 03/16/17 05:06 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
tacit Offline


Registered: 08/03/09
Loc: Portland, Oregon, USA
Rubber Glove will reduce the uniqueness of your signature, but not remove it entirely. The developers are still actively developing it, and each update removes more and more unique identifying bits of information.
_________________________
Photo gallery, all about me, and more: www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Top
#44006 - 03/16/17 05:14 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: kevs
Joe, have you or anyone seen Panopticlick give a verdict of anything other than unique or near unique fingerprint? I haven't.

You obviously didn't read the post to which you just responded.

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
...according to Panopticlick when taken together with Badger (which installs from the Panopticlick site) [Tor] provides partial protection of the fingerprint at the medium level of protection and full fingerprint protection at the maximum level. (Emphasis added)
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44007 - 03/16/17 05:25 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: tacit]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Is there some aspect of Chrome that enables RubberGlove to developed for it, but not for Safari, or is it simply developer choice?
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44009 - 03/16/17 06:02 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Artie I read the post and I asked, and I'm still asking: Tacit others:

anyone seen Panopticlick give a verdict of anything other than unique or near unique fingerprint? I haven't.

Those are the only 2 results I have ever seen.

Tacit, thanks. I'm not even sure Rubber Glove works, I click the hand and then start Panopticlick, and the result is: you have a unique fingerprint. Which is not even as good as I get on my own, the "you have a nearly unique fingerprint".

Of course, maybe I'm not using it correctly I have no idea.

BTW, in the Panopticlick, analysis, it seems, that system font reading is 90% of that fingerprint? If one could block that...

Top
#44010 - 03/16/17 06:15 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: kevs
Artie I read the post and I asked, and I'm still asking: Tacit others:

anyone seen Panopticlick give a verdict of anything other than unique or near unique fingerprint? I haven't.

One of us is missing something here, kevs.

joemike reported "partial protection of the fingerprint at the medium level of protection and full fingerprint protection at the maximum level", which, respectively, surpass and far surpass "unique or near unique fingerprint", while using Tor.

Why isn't that a positive answer to your question? confused
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44012 - 03/16/17 06:45 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
ARtie,

Partial protection and full protection are not terms that define the results after clicking the test button, and hence, have nothing to do with my question.

They may describe something Joe is talking about, (which I don't fully understand), but my question is about something totally different with different terminologies.

Have you run the test?

Top
#44013 - 03/16/17 07:14 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Aaah! Okay, I see where you're at.

It sounds to me as if joemike's terms, while they're not specifically Panopticlick terms, do answer your question, albeit obliquely, but it's now up to him to say aye or nay.

I've run Panopticlick from Safari, the only browser I regularly use, and it rated me "almost unique", which doesn't bother me, because so much of me is already out there that trying to stop the flow of innocuous info at this point seems to me to be wasted effort; my preference is to keep the innocuous stuff flowing to whatever degree is beyond my ability to squelch without going to extremes and to use Tor if I've got something to hide.

I think "hiding" should be more within the purview of kids who are starting out fresh on the Internet and, of course, people who've got a specific purpose in mind.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44014 - 03/16/17 08:19 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
BTW side note: I was able to keep seeing Washington Post Online, even with their article limit by clearing cache, but that does not work anymore suddenly. Are they using fingerprinting?

Top
#44020 - 03/17/17 09:07 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
In an attempt to clarify my previous post. There are two software elements involved...
  1. The TOR browser (donationware)
  2. Badger (freeware)

The TOR browser has three user selectable levels of security
  1. Low (default)
  2. Medium
  3. High

On the LOW setting all normal browser functions are sup0orted and Panopticlick reports
  • Is your browser blocking tracking ads: ✓ Yes
  • Is your browser blocking invisible trackers: ✓ Yes
  • Does your browser unblock 3rd parties that promise to honor Do Not Track? No
  • Does your browser protect from fingerprinting? Partial

On the MEDIUM setting Javascript performance otions are disabled, scripts may run more slower, HTML 5 runs click to play, some math functions are dusabled, some font rendering options are disabled and Panopticlick reports
  • Is your browser blocking tracking ads: ✓ Yes
  • Is your browser blocking invisible trackers: ✓ Yes
  • Does your browser unblock 3rd parties that promise to honor Do Not Track? No
  • Does your browser protect from fingerprinting? Partial Protection

On the MAXIMUM setting Javascriot is disabled, Javascript performance otions are disabled, scripts may run more slower, HTML 5 runs click to play, some math functions are dusabled, some font rendering options are disabled and Panopticlick reports
  • Is your browser blocking tracking ads: ✓ Yes
  • Is your browser blocking invisible trackers: ✓ Yes
  • Does your browser unblock 3rd parties that promise to honor Do Not Track? No
  • Does your browser protect from fingerprinting? ✓ YES

NOTES:
  1. With Medium and high level protection settings you can allow some protection features to be turned off on a site by site basis.
  2. Without Badger Tor does not report any blocking of tracking ads or invisible trackers.
  3. traffic is routed through a variety of domestic and European servers to disguise your origin and you can change the routing on the fly — I have two tabs open at the moment and and each is going through a different set of overseas servers.
  4. you can spoof almost any make browser you desire.

For iOS
  • The TOR browser per se is not available for iOS devices, however there are several TOR based browsers in the iTunes Store but I have yet to find one that has all the features of TOR or that doesn't come with and expensive subscription price (one is $30 a month).
  • Badger is not available for iOS either but Disconnect works the same way and seems to be very effective.


Edited by joemikeb (03/17/17 09:16 AM)
Edit Reason: typo
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#44021 - 03/17/17 09:49 AM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Thanks for clarifying all that for kevs.

As I surmised, you have, in fact, seen Panopticlick reports other than "almost unique" and "unique".
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44023 - 03/17/17 02:32 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Well after downloading and testing every iOS browser claiming to the based on TOR. Most of them verified they were using the TOR network but there were a few that used their own VPN (at a hefty price). Not one passed Panopticlick's test for hiding the signature. mad While TOR is based in Mozilla and can use Mozilla extensions and has functionality to be the default browser for many users these browsers are pretty minimal..
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#44024 - 03/17/17 04:09 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Thanks Joe, now I get it.

But I might think because Tor is so rare, so rare, that Google would know it's me. Almost like a proxy right, which Google can figure out?... if that made sense. (Google has good proxy detection)

bTW notice in Panopticlick that most of the identifying thing is the system fonts, am I wrong on that? So if you could just block visibility of those...

Top
#44025 - 03/17/17 04:40 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: kevs]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: kevs
But I might think because Tor is so rare, so rare, that Google would know it's me. Almost like a proxy right, which Google can figure out?... if that made sense. (Google has good proxy detection)

bTW notice in Panopticlick that most of the identifying thing is the system fonts, am I wrong on that? So if you could just block visibility of those...

I'll guess that at its safest setting Tor blocks so much stuff that Google won't allow you to "play" under any circumstances.

I don't see how system fonts can identify you when every Mac running a particular version of OS X/macOS, perhaps even every Mac, has the same font set; user installed fonts, sure, but not fonts that the OS, itself, installs.


Edited by artie505 (03/17/17 04:51 PM)
Edit Reason: Expand
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#44026 - 03/17/17 05:08 PM Re: Private window does not hide identity? [Re: joemikeb]
kevs Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
PS,JOE, where are setting, Low Medium etc? Can't find.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Moderator:  alternaut, dianne, MacManiac