Michael Mol wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Michael Hampicke <gentoo-u...@hadt.biz> > wrote: >>> There is actually a huge amount of information available, giving a high >>> level of pseudo-uniqueness. There was a web site that showed you how >>> much it could glean from even an anonymous session, but I can't remember >>> where is was. Somewhere like the EFF. >> >> I guess you mean https://panopticlick.eff.org/ >> > > My results from work: > > Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 1,939,102 tested so > far. > > Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that > conveys at least 20.89 bits of identifying information. >
Funny, I get exactly the same thing except add one to the large number. I guess you tested before I did. How does one avoid this but still have sites work? Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
