NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 19, 2024 Posted August 19, 2024 (edited) <del> wrong historical hash </disregard> Edited August 19, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 19, 2024 Posted August 19, 2024 1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: JA3 Hash: https://tls.browserleaks.com/iframe/ja3_hash As far as JA3 is concerned, Ungoogled v122, Supermium v122, and Supermium v124 all behave identically. Refresh the above URL twenty times and you will get twenty different results. Do that test in Serpent 52 or 360Chrome and all twenty refreshes are IDENTICAL.
D.Draker Posted August 19, 2024 Posted August 19, 2024 11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: As far as JA3 is concerned, Ungoogled v122, Supermium v122, and Supermium v124 all behave identically. Refresh the above URL twenty times and you will get twenty different results. Yes, they finally made a spoof function (I think starting somewhere in v.115 or so). Earlier, I used to randomise it by playing with ciphers/their quantity. But then again, Akamai stays the same. 4
Dixel Posted August 19, 2024 Author Posted August 19, 2024 Saw this? https://www.zenrows.com/blog/bypass-cloudflare#how-cloudflare-detects-bots 3
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 19, 2024 Posted August 19, 2024 I kind of think that you are both missing the bigger point. You both tested the non-MSFN's post and made it past the captcha. ie, you willfully ADDED YOURSELF to Cloudflare's "database of pre-collected fingerprint hashes". Let's face it, if we were deadset serious about fingerprint prevention, we WANT the Cloudflare captchas to FAIL and we would NEVER reduce our defenses to make it past them, we'd boycott any-and-all web sites that requested a captcha (automated or manual). As is, TOO LATE, the fingerprint left behind TWENTY YEARS AGO, before any of us knew what a "fingerprint" even was and we only worried about "cookies", that fingerprint from TWENTY YEARS AGO is still contained in that "database". And, no offense, while *MY* view (below) of MSFN does NOT display profile pics, I still know that both of you have one. If that profile pic is really *YOU*, how can you seek to be privacy-conscious when your profile is a PICTURE OF YOU?
Dixel Posted August 20, 2024 Author Posted August 20, 2024 12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: I kind of think that you are both missing the bigger point. You both tested the non-MSFN's post and made it past the captcha. ie, you willfully ADDED YOURSELF to Cloudflare's "database of pre-collected fingerprint hashes". Let's face it, if we were deadset serious about fingerprint prevention, we WANT the Cloudflare captchas to FAIL and we would NEVER reduce our defenses to make it past them, we'd boycott any-and-all web sites that requested a captcha (automated or manual). As is, TOO LATE, the fingerprint left behind TWENTY YEARS AGO, before any of us knew what a "fingerprint" even was and we only worried about "cookies", that fingerprint from TWENTY YEARS AGO is still contained in that "database". And, no offence, while *MY* view (below) of MSFN does NOT display profile pics, I still know that both of you have one. If that profile pic is really *YOU*, how can you seek to be privacy-conscious when your profile is a PICTURE OF YOU? You also claimed that you were blocking the "like" function, not only photos. You're right, I agree about the boycott, I even think I already suggested it many years ago. I'm deadset serious about faking my fingerprints, make them multiple, randomise, not to block completely, but make them similar to the most common ones, I don't know what others want. I didn't post my pic. at cloudflare, I posted it at MSFN, what does it have to do with the topic discussion? 3
Dixel Posted August 20, 2024 Author Posted August 20, 2024 12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: that fingerprint from TWENTY YEARS AGO is still contained in that "database". HTTP/2 fingerprinting wasn't there 20 years ago, it's a relatively new method for web fingerprinting, This article includes the on-topic Client Hints. "HTTP/2 fingerprinting is a method by which web servers can identify which client is sending the request to them1. It can identify the browser type and version, for instance, or whether a script is used. The method relies on the internals of the HTTP/2 protocol which are less widely known that those of its simpler predecessor HTTP/1.1. In this post I will first give a short description of the HTTP/2 protocol, then provide details on how a web server can use the protocol’s various parameters to identify the client. Finally, I will list methods of checking and controlling a client’s HTTP/2 signature." https://lwthiker.com/networks/2022/06/17/http2-fingerprinting.html 3
Dixel Posted August 20, 2024 Author Posted August 20, 2024 Second Part: "I would like to expand about server-side browser fingerprinting. Server-side fingerprinting is a collection of techniques used by web servers to identify which web client is making a request based on network parameters sent by the client. By web client I mean the type of client, as in which browser or CLI tool, and not a specific user like what a cookie identifies." "TLS fingerprinting: How it works, where it is used and how to control your signature..." https://lwthiker.com/networks/2022/06/17/tls-fingerprinting.html 4
D.Draker Posted August 21, 2024 Posted August 21, 2024 @NotHereToPlayGames, out of the blue, now Patreon quits working for me. Console? Nothing interesting! On Vista. 1
D.Draker Posted August 21, 2024 Posted August 21, 2024 Tried again with different UA, At first, it starts to load the link, then it quickly blocks me. Cent Browser. Console almost empty. 1
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 21, 2024 Posted August 21, 2024 4 hours ago, D.Draker said: @NotHereToPlayGames, out of the blue, now Patreon quits working for me. Console? Nothing interesting! On Vista. These banners mean nothing. Or, better yet, "don't tell the whole story". This particular banner has NOTHING to do about your "browser" being out of date - I get no banner in 360Chrome 13.5.1030 (v86) faking a Win10 UserAgent. There are no ClientHints in 13.5.1030 (v86).
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 21, 2024 Posted August 21, 2024 I can't even get that banner in Supermium v122 in XP x86. No extensions. No nothing, just default everything. No interest in Cent Browser so did not try with it. I have to assume it's newer that v122, I get you confused with your "likers" but I thought you were against any browser more than a couple versions old. I don't even keep track of what version browsers are up to, this dog doesn't chase his tail.
Sampei.Nihira Posted August 22, 2024 Posted August 22, 2024 (edited) 17 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: I can't even get that banner in Supermium v122 in XP x86. No extensions. No nothing, just default everything. No interest in Cent Browser so did not try with it. I have to assume it's newer that v122, I get you confused with your "likers" but I thought you were against any browser more than a couple versions old. I don't even keep track of what version browsers are up to, this dog doesn't chase his tail. It is a Chromium (118.0.5993.159)-based browser. (November 2023) Edited August 22, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 22, 2024 Posted August 22, 2024 I do not get that "useless update banner" in Ungoogled v118 either. This is either a Cent only issue (no interest in running Cent) or it's the user's profile/setup. I tried, in vain, to reproduce the issue and get that banner. Assuming 8 different browsers, old and older and older yet, on three different OSs but NOT trying Cent can be considered "in vain".
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 22, 2024 Posted August 22, 2024 On a side note as far as just how "old" is considered "old". I always rebuild any Chrome extension that I use, I basically never install from the Chrome Web Store, I always download the .crx and manually customize it to MY LIKING, repack, and only then use said extension. While I've not bothered to enquire the "why", but it is VERY common for the manifest.json to site "minimum_chrome_version": "120.0.0.0". So from that, yeah, Cent is "old" if it is v118. What showed up in v120 that many extensions cite it as minumum? No clue, to be perfectly honest. But I still cannot get that "update banner". Is the OP still getting it in his Cent?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now