"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." --Edward Snowden
>Recommended operating systems General purpose: Fedora, K/L/Xubuntu, Arch Linux Privacy focused: Whonix, Tails, Qubes OS
>Recommended mobile operating systems Android based: GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, LineageOS/DivestOS Linux based: PureOS, postmarketOS
newfag question: could someone explain to me why every "privacy" browser suggests not to maximize the browser? Sure, okay, websites can read your browser resolution. But you can't tell me that being one of a million users with browser maximized at 1920x1080 (or any other common monitor size) hides you worse than whatever random dimensions you resize your browser to?
Camden Williams
is there any browser that says that and isn't tor browser? if that's tor, it's to make all tor users have the same fingerprint
Jeremiah James
Depends on whether your ISP sells the domains they log on their domain server.
They COULD skim the domain names off of your TLS handshake.
They change when your system font is not the same or you changed the task bar and when you have bookmarks shown or hidden
Jacob Perry
Maximizing (not opening in fullscreen) reaches different screen sizes for different users. A malicious site could not only get a unique fingerprint of you, but could easily narrow down your desktop environment. Gapped windows, taskbars, UI scaling, bookmarks bar, etc all effect browser screen size when you "maximize". Letterboxing makes fingerprinting less effective, think of it like rounding a number up or down to make it imprecise. A lot of this is done with JavaScript, so blocking that by default is half the battle. (So much as running a fingerprinting test with JS enabled on TOR Browser on a portrait monitor gets you a unique fingerprint.) LibreWolf (and I assume Firefox as well) have it as an option.
Gavin Wilson
>LibreWolf (and I assume Firefox as well) have it as an option.
The domain could only be parsed by the SNI at that point
Samuel Ramirez
That's because it's really not, the backdoors they have are more subtle than that, complaining about Intel ME is just a smoke screen for privacy noobs who really don't know what they're talking about, like (you)
as says I think librewolf might actually be the only one that says so, other than tor. brave says it returns "random fingerprinting values". I haven't used palemoon in a long time so I'm not sure if that does anything about it.
However, re-reading librewolf's faq, I think I misunderstood what it is saying. It says: >we suggest against modifying any metric involved in RFP implying not to resize the browser at all - just as tor suggests the same, so that all users of the browser have the same screen size - rather than avoiding specifically maximizing it
Jeremiah Wright
One of these days I'm going to find out who you are, and then you're fucking dead
>privacy tools are a honeypot So how is ecryptfs a honeypot?
Lucas Miller
You're fucking retarded. I've fucking had it with fucking retards on this thread.
>worrying about IME when you have no idea what it even does >probably don't even know about libreboot and coreboot >not realizing ME can be unhooked from southbridge and disabled >Forgetting that IME has to be set up first before it's used >Not realizing the actual intricate spy tools that US agencies have such as XKEYSCORE, OLYMPUSFIRE, and every firmware exploit in the book >Not realizing that the real 'hardware backdoors' glowies supposedly have take the form of secret CPU instructions >Being drunkenly ignorant on the issue of encryption crippling
Do your homework! Meanwhile, you're probably not running a firewall or IDS on your network. You're an actual fucking tard. A skiddie could hack you in an hour. I know because I'm a skiddie and even I would have no trouble with you. Fucking dumbass.
>>not realizing ME can be unhooked from southbridge and disabled lol retard IME is on northbridge, or now PCH on modern boards
Easton Martin
Sorry, my mistake. Not quite my area of expertise, admittedly.
Oliver Robinson
>>Not realizing that the real 'hardware backdoors' glowies supposedly have take the form of secret CPU instructions Do those work remotely
Parker Howard
I just want to add that I do all my Kosher computing on a custom ARM chip anyway. I'm pretty sure that one isn't backdoored by the way, seeing as how ARM schematics are open source. The manufacturers of my ARM64 chipset claim their supply line is secure and they use all open source no spyware. The point is, secure silicon exists. If for no other reason, then just because there's a market demand for it.
>do CPU instructions work remotely Why don't you get at least a Bachelor's and then come back here. Seriously, a dumb question, again. You can put them in an executable and run it. The executable can get in over your network, or over some other radio.
