Self destructing cookies

Exactly
If your unique your will be one in several billion
if your unique to panopticlick you will be unique as in one in a data set of several million
If you want to blend in you are aiming for a low score - obviously one in five thousand is better in this regard than one in a million.

 

really , i see , so according to techwiz using uacontrol and having a default spoofed useragent set seems to be better than having it change per tab , how would i go about doing so popcorn or techwiz or both , please add your wisdom , we ought to come to a solution here , and i didnt know thats how panopticlick works , thou ive heard its ratings are kinda untrustworthy since it gets like updated every aeon or so , lol

 

I would just use the default UA providing it's main stream and used by the masses
This along side NoScript/ScriptSafe should negate most browser fingerprinting tech's.

 

now all we need to know wich one is main stream and where to find that ilusive main stream UA or is there such an addon that does this automatically that would be epic, is this mainstream enough


Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:19.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/19.0

 

and what about this statement

 

The only benefit that you gain by changing between tabs is cross site finger printing, but why bother? If the user agent string is bogus, then they really aren't finger printing you, but the bogus string. The only time I'd be paranoid enough to worry about cross site finger printing is in dealing with the big three letter agencies (NSA, FBI, etc.) and they have more sophisticated tools to rely on. As for implementation, that would depend on your browser. I know how to manipulate the firefox UA string manually via about:config, but UAControl is more manageable. I'm also recalling that opera lets you manipulate through its settings, but seeing as I don't use this take with a grain of salt.


Some reference material in designing valid UA strings:
-httx://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms537503%28v=vs.85%29.aspx-
-httx://www.useragentstring.com/pages/Browserlist/-

 

well i had uacontrol then i ditched it since i wasnt sure with what user agent to go , its not like theres a site with a recommended useragent string to choose from, any pointers

 

I agree in theory but I would have to be uberparanoid
With a VPN and an average UA getting tracked by UA alone is very unlikely if it's even possible...

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:19.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/19.0
I haven't tried this one I haven't seen it before.

Here's one good reason not to use an unique UA - http://www.ua-tracker.com/

 

If your not careful you can break your browsers functionality. Some sites won't display because your supposedly running a unsupported browser. Firefox needs to update, so UAControl makes easy work of getting around such problems. The issue is to what degree should you change? Should you run a string for a completely different OS/Browser or keep it simple and just change the OS/Browser versions?

On a side note, I did manage to get SDC to work properly for my needs, but I'm still experiencing some unresolved website lagging on flash related sites like youtube, facebook, etc. Video's are no longer properly caching and it shouldn't have anything to do with SDC.

 

well im still waiting for that conclusion and pointer

 

Some strings on here are more recent than others but I think this is regularly updated
http://www.useragentstring.com/pages/useragentstring.php

 

I've got to head to school, but I'd be interested to discuss this further by message seeing as we kind of hijacked this thread

 

Totally agree you can seriously upset some sites with the wrong string
I have run Ubuntu and live CD's with a Windows string and had relatively few problems
I try to blend in in plain sight switching browsers depending on what I'm doing and where I'm going.

I'm glad SDC is working for you now
I would pay for a Chrome version if anyone's listening....

 

no problem just send me what you got and we can continue from there , thou im sure popcorn dont care since it does go hand in hand with overall browser security wich sefldestruct cookies counts too as well


btw popcorn , ive checked out that link of yours and all those useragents dont matter what os or browser are pretty old remember your average user updates his browser at the latest every 6-9 months tops , hell theyre "newest" user agent is firefox 16 , lols

 

You should be able to update chrome and firefox strings based on the update channels. Also the link I posted for Microsoft lists the OS number you'll need to utilize. So presuming popcorn hasn't had any issues using a string from a completely different operating system (i.e a linux user using a windows string). It seems that we might be able to get away with doing that. In this case, there shouldn't be a long list of pointers:

Three Primary Steps:
(1) Pick a different, but current OS from a user-string list.
(2) Pick a different browser type, update version with update channel(s).
(3) Keep track of changes to the user agent string.

Where we are going to hit problems is in picking a proper string that comes from a different operating system and browser. The easiest solution would be to build a list of current strings that gets updated by the community. In place of that, there are ways around this which have been listed. Use the update channel and online resources like Microsoft to determine your browser/OS values. Where I expect the most difficulty with this second option is accounting for sudden changes like firefox suddenly not using gecko and it being replaced in later updates or adding something else to the string. Likewise, windows users seeking to use linux strings might need to know if there are differences between a Mint string or a Ubuntu string. We might only be able to support a few distros if this is the case, which means only the most popular (most used).

Another reference with some linux examples (swap x for p before pasting):
-httx://user-agents.my-addr.com/user_agent_request/user_agent_examples-and-user_agent_types.php-

 

Yup your right
I should of had a closer look last time I used this site was late summer last year it was pretty current then lol
Oh well as Techwiz stated with a little "craft" these strings can still be turned to purpose
This is an older string -Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/6.0
but still very popular/in use.

 

not an add on but win patrol will delete cookies. you can select text to indicate which ones.

 

i meant more something like self destruct cookies types of addons , about having cookies auto delete on browser close i dont worry to much bout that since i got my browser sandboxed and cookies arent one of the files on my exceptions list