Privacy group warns of web browser 'fingerprinting'

By Rosalie Marshall on May 19, 2010 3:51 AM
Filed under Security

Unique signatures that can track surfers.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has issued a warning about web sites that track browser "fingerprints".

Most browsers have unique signatures that allow web site owners to see exactly who is visiting their web site, according to research by the US privacy organisation.

The EFF suggested that browser fingerprinting should be considered alongside cookies and IP addresses when discussing web privacy and the ability to track surfers.

The group also urged browser developers to reduce such privacy risks in future versions of their code.

The findings are the results of an EFF experiment using a site that anonymously logged the configuration and version information of volunteers' operating systems, browsers and browser plug-ins, and compared the information with a database of configurations collected from almost a million other visitors.

The EFF found that 84 per cent of the configuration combinations were unique and identifiable.

Browsers with Adobe Flash or Java plug-ins installed were even more likely to give unique configurations, while browsers less likely to do so were those that block JavaScript or are configured to limit the information shared with web sites.

"We took measures to keep participants in our experiment anonymous, but most sites don't do that," said EFF senior staff technologist Peter Eckersley.

"In fact, several companies are already selling products that claim to use browser fingerprinting to help web sites identify users and their online activities.

He added that the experiment is "an important reality check" which proves how powerful these tracking mechanisms are.

Privacy group warns of web browser 'fingerprinting'

9 comments in this discussion

"ITnovice wrote: Can anyone add to this article by saying which browsers are best for protecting privacy? or ways of limiting info given out through java or flash? This is a link to a ..."

By Slatts

Tags

browser, eff, web, privacy, unique, browsers

Google may cop $10m fine for Safari gaffe

Microsoft to bring Skype to browsers?

EU backs Google privacy policy 'pause'

Microsoft signs EU accords on data privacy

Breaking Stories

Australia shares $2bn Square Kilometre Array

RIM to cut 2000 jobs

NSW retains right to veto data centre co-tenants

Optus to launch federated APAC cloud

NBN Co expands wireless trials

Comments: 9

Digger11 May 19, 2010 8:52 AM	We all know that The Electronic Frontier Foundation is just a front for the criminal supporting group who incorrectly name themselves CIVIL LIBERTARIANS. I am 100% sure they support the ludicrous new fine that our wonderful Nanny state of Victoria has just brought in - in that you can be fined up to $350 for leaving you car umlocked (even in your own driveway !!!). I also heard that a new law proposed by the CIVIL LIBERTARIANS will mean that if you leave your car unlocked and it gets stolen by a bottom feeding, low life criminal scum, then you will have to pay the criminal $1,250 immediately, give him/her $72 p.m. for ever, and mow the criminals lawn twice a month for the next 5 years - as it was your fault for not locking your car !!!!
Slatts May 19, 2010 9:40 AM	Whoa there digger! Down boy! Have you had your medication today? So, EFF = civil libertarians = want to fine you for leaving your car unlocked (a good idea in my opinion, means the police don't have to look for the stolen cars of stupid people). And how about a link to a reputable site that supports your last paragraph?
Sams May 19, 2010 10:04 AM	I think the car lock law is unfair, especially when someone can steal a car just by looking at it ;-)
Ace May 19, 2010 12:54 PM	Wasn't there a case just recently in Germany where a guy got fined $164 for leaving his home WiFi access insecure while he was on holiday? Anyway, the article appeared (to me at least) to be about Web Browser finger-printing, not car or data theft. It is quite an interesting area for privacy - regarding the collection of publicly available data. Google have been called on it, and they are just the tip of the iceberg.
Digger11 May 19, 2010 2:33 PM	Good logical thinking - you leave your car wireless conenction insecure, or car unlocked and YOU get fined. Let's not worry about the people doing the stealing - they may have had a tough childhood or more likely come from a Country that was a bit tough..... That is worse than a Nanny state - it is just pro-criminal thinking. Slatts - the last paragraph may not be exactly 100% true.
Mordd May 19, 2010 3:50 PM	Was tempted to counter diggers rant with a copy of the same replacing EFF with AFACT and twisting the perspective around, but then again his postings on this article are so bizarro world crazy that it doesn't really need countering does it? @Digger - can i have some of what you're smoking though, must be good stuff man!
ITnovice May 19, 2010 9:57 PM	Can anyone add to this article by saying which browsers are best for protecting privacy? or ways of limiting info given out through java or flash?
Slatts May 24, 2010 8:14 PM	Digger11 wrote: Good logical thinking - you leave your car wireless conenction insecure, or car unlocked and YOU get fined. Let's not worry about the people doing the stealing - they may have had a tough childhood or more likely come from a Country that was a bit tough..... That is worse than a Nanny state - it is just pro-criminal thinking. Slatts - the last paragraph may not be exactly 100% true. Digger.... Are you Tony Abbott?
Slatts May 24, 2010 8:37 PM	ITnovice wrote: Can anyone add to this article by saying which browsers are best for protecting privacy? or ways of limiting info given out through java or flash? This is a link to a thread on the PCAuthority forum that covers my reasons for saying Firefox.