this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
52 points (100.0% liked)
Privacy
47352 readers
593 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
TL;DR The only way to avoid a near unique fingerprint is Tor Browser
Longer explanation: There are too many styles of fingerprinting protections: randomized and normalized.
Librewolf inherits its fingerprint protections from Firefox (which intern was upstreamed from the Tor uplift project. It works by taking as many fingerprintable characteristics (refresh rate, canvas, resolution, theme, timezone, etc) and normalizes them to a static value to be shared by all browsers using the feature (privacy.resistFingerprinting in about:config). The benefit of normalizing is you appear more generic, though there are many limitations (biggest of which is OS because you cant hide that). The purpose design of these protections stems from the anonymization strategy of Tor which is to blend in with all other users so no individual can be differentiated based on identifiers. Since Librewolf has different a default settings profile to Tor (or Mullvad) and even vanilla Firefox with RFP enabled, the best you can hope is to blend in with other Librewolf users (which you really cant, especially if you install extensions or change [some] specific settings). Instead, the goal is just to fool naive fingerprinting scripts, nation states or any skilled adversary is out of the scope.
Brave (or Cromite) uses the strategy of randomizing fingerprintable characteristics. This is only meant to fool naive FP scripts but in my opinion (when done right) is better at fooling naive scripts. The biggest problem is that these attempts by other browsers and not as comprehensive as Firefox. I think Cromite does a better job than Brave: it is the only browser which fools Creepjs that I have tried by creating a new FP on refresh. Cromite required some configuring to get to place I wanted it, but so does every browser.
The advantage with Firefox forks is that vanilla Firefox has RFP and therefore so do the forks (though most dont enable), but you dont blend i with a crowd (making it far less effective than MB or Tor). The advantage of Brave or Cromite is a randomized FP, bit since it isnt upstreamed (and Google will never do that) you stand out like a sore thumb. Either way is fine though for basically everyone.
The only browsers I know that work against Creepjs are as follows:
Thanks a lot for the detailed answer.
My goal is pretty simple : I don't want to give my data with big tech and gov for ideological reason more than for security but I don't want to use tools that makes me stand out like a sore thumb.
Mullvad has been recommended twice, I'll have a look and see if it fits my need.
@Neptr @Username85920
by default TOR browser did not pass the fingerprint test
Your browser has a non-unique fingerprint.Definitely need to change some settings in the browser , I'll try
They is the right result, non-unique fingerprint is what you want with Tor Browser.
@Neptr
You're right, it was my mistake.
Creepjs is not a valid metric for fingerprinting protection.
It still gives metrics. And yes, Creepjs is not very useful against randomized values, though I noted it still because Brave fails (resulting in a persistent fingerprint) whereas Cromite succeeded to fool Creepjs. Both have many methods of fingerprinting protection.
Checking the fingerprinting protections of Mullvad and Tor is better done with TorZillaPrint test page by Arkenfox. It is optimized to tell you whether you blend in correctly with RFP normalized values.
The Brave browser has much better blocking capabilities with the goal of offering all of the uBlock Origins features, while Cromite has an ABP integration which has weaker and less support for advanced filterlists. The default filterlists selection is also quite questionable. A blocked script can no longer track you.
Brave's fingerprinting protection measures are technically speaking superior than Cromite, the only reason that CreepJS can't be fooled by it all the time (I've done my own tests and it fails sometimes) is that it has specifically been designed to adapt to its protection mechanisms, which hasn't been done for Cromite.
You can also harden Brave to increase its level of protection:
https://www.privacyguides.org/en/desktop-browsers/#brave
https://www.privacyguides.org/en/mobile-browsers/#recommended-brave-configuration