Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
It's not clear if this GDID also exists in older versions of Windows.According to a Microsoft representative, a Global Device Identifier in the Windows ecosystem is a persistent, device-level identifier designed to uniquely identify an installation of a Windows operating system on a device, either a physical device (e.g., a mobile phone or laptop) or virtual machine, across certain Microsoft services and scenarios.
A GDID is a globally unique identifier tied to the installation of Windows on a device. A GDID remains consistent across Windows operating system updates on a device, but a reinstall of Windows, either on the same device or on a different device, will be tied to a new unique GDID.
It's not clear if this GDID also exists in older versions of Windows.According to a Microsoft representative, a Global Device Identifier in the Windows ecosystem is a persistent, device-level identifier designed to uniquely identify an installation of a Windows operating system on a device, either a physical device (e.g., a mobile phone or laptop) or virtual machine, across certain Microsoft services and scenarios.
A GDID is a globally unique identifier tied to the installation of Windows on a device. A GDID remains consistent across Windows operating system updates on a device, but a reinstall of Windows, either on the same device or on a different device, will be tied to a new unique GDID.
So do I.]]>
So do I.]]>
The Windows GDID, or at least the infrastructure for it, is said to date back to the release of Windows 10 in 2015. The GDID itself doesn't show up much in online documentation until 2021 or thereabouts.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/managed-desktop/developer/mmd-api-list-devices
the fact that the global ID exists is not a secret. This format of device ID has been in Windows since the initial release of Windows 10 in 2015, when it was introduced as part of Windows' current telemetry subsystem. To see your device's global ID, open Windows Feedback Hub, then go to Feedback Hub Settings and look under Device Information.
]]>Windows 10 vs Windows 11: Does Telemetry Differ?
Both Windows 10 and Windows 11 implement the same two-tier diagnostic data model, and both use GDID-style persistent device identifiers in their telemetry pipelines. Windows 11 introduced some additional telemetry categories around Copilot AI interactions and the new Start menu and widgets feed, which can send usage signals back to Microsoft. In practice, Windows 11’s deeper integration of Microsoft account sign-in and the Microsoft Store means more data surfaces are active by default compared to a minimally configured Windows 10 installation.
That said, the controls available are broadly equivalent between the two versions — the same Settings paths, the same Group Policy keys, and the same service-disabling commands apply to both.
The Windows GDID, or at least the infrastructure for it, is said to date back to the release of Windows 10 in 2015. The GDID itself doesn't show up much in online documentation until 2021 or thereabouts.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/managed-desktop/developer/mmd-api-list-devices
the fact that the global ID exists is not a secret. This format of device ID has been in Windows since the initial release of Windows 10 in 2015, when it was introduced as part of Windows' current telemetry subsystem. To see your device's global ID, open Windows Feedback Hub, then go to Feedback Hub Settings and look under Device Information.
]]>Windows 10 vs Windows 11: Does Telemetry Differ?
Both Windows 10 and Windows 11 implement the same two-tier diagnostic data model, and both use GDID-style persistent device identifiers in their telemetry pipelines. Windows 11 introduced some additional telemetry categories around Copilot AI interactions and the new Start menu and widgets feed, which can send usage signals back to Microsoft. In practice, Windows 11’s deeper integration of Microsoft account sign-in and the Microsoft Store means more data surfaces are active by default compared to a minimally configured Windows 10 installation.
That said, the controls available are broadly equivalent between the two versions — the same Settings paths, the same Group Policy keys, and the same service-disabling commands apply to both.
Attachments
Attachments
There is an issue report about that:
There is an issue report about that:
Attachments
Attachments
Meanwhile, maybe we could get a v152.0.6 which includes these security fixes ?By the way about 153, I'd need to refactor a lot of the code for it, and I don't feel up to that right now, especially now that I get headaches every day aaaaaaaaaa. e3k 153 is unlikely to come soon, so it will likely be a while until r3dfox 153 comes.
Meanwhile, maybe we could get a v152.0.6 which includes these security fixes ?By the way about 153, I'd need to refactor a lot of the code for it, and I don't feel up to that right now, especially now that I get headaches every day aaaaaaaaaa. e3k 153 is unlikely to come soon, so it will likely be a while until r3dfox 153 comes.
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
Attachments
Attachments
Someone already reported the distorted zoom levels to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178138the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 I think this is better reported to bugzilla.mozilla.org and not here.
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
Someone already reported the distorted zoom levels to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178138the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 I think this is better reported to bugzilla.mozilla.org and not here.
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
Yeah that goes way over my head and skillset. Good luck265 993 303 wrote: ↑25 Jul 2026, 08:32Someone already reported the distorted zoom levels to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178138the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 I think this is better reported to bugzilla.mozilla.org and not here.
I reported the image zoom issue: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2057719
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
But the underlying issue goes much deeper as other zoom levels still get distorted in 2015-04-29 version. In fact, going all the way back to 2007-10-26-05-trunk, the very first version to have zoom option (the list of zoom levels was called toolkit.zoomManager.fullZoomValues instead of toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues) that version still distorts zoom levels. If I set toolkit.zoomManager.fullZoomValues to 1,1.7 and I try to display a 384×96 image in 170% zoom, it gets displayed in 2094×523 size. This does not correspond to round(384×1.7×3)×round(96×1.7×3) which would have been 1958×490. It corresponds to floor(384×(20÷11)×3)×floor(96×(20÷11)×3). The same characteristic numerator of 20 appears!
Earlier versions (such as 2007-10-25-04-trunk) have a Text Size option instead of Zoom. The Text Size option covers a broad range of sizes (it seems to have 20 scale levels), but it doesn't show any numbers for scale and doesn't seem to be configurable in about:config.
Yeah that goes way over my head and skillset. Good luck265 993 303 wrote: ↑25 Jul 2026, 08:32Someone already reported the distorted zoom levels to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178138the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 I think this is better reported to bugzilla.mozilla.org and not here.
I reported the image zoom issue: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2057719
The zoom level 0.333333333333333333333 does not get distorted in 2015-04-29-03-02-02-mozilla-central but it gets distorted in 2015-04-30-03-02-01-mozilla-central (both are firefox-40.0a2.en-US.win32). In fact, 2015-04-30 distorts the zoom value when switching tabs, even if the tab remains open!the_r3dacted wrote: ↑24 Jul 2026, 21:54 If you were to go through nightly builds and figure out where it first occurs, I could try fixing it though.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/
But the underlying issue goes much deeper as other zoom levels still get distorted in 2015-04-29 version. In fact, going all the way back to 2007-10-26-05-trunk, the very first version to have zoom option (the list of zoom levels was called toolkit.zoomManager.fullZoomValues instead of toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues) that version still distorts zoom levels. If I set toolkit.zoomManager.fullZoomValues to 1,1.7 and I try to display a 384×96 image in 170% zoom, it gets displayed in 2094×523 size. This does not correspond to round(384×1.7×3)×round(96×1.7×3) which would have been 1958×490. It corresponds to floor(384×(20÷11)×3)×floor(96×(20÷11)×3). The same characteristic numerator of 20 appears!
Earlier versions (such as 2007-10-25-04-trunk) have a Text Size option instead of Zoom. The Text Size option covers a broad range of sizes (it seems to have 20 scale levels), but it doesn't show any numbers for scale and doesn't seem to be configurable in about:config.
In this case it's falling back to general.useragent.override because I have set one.]]>the_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20 I believe that if you set them to nothing it should treat it as if they didn't exist though afaik.
In this case it's falling back to general.useragent.override because I have set one.]]>the_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20 I believe that if you set them to nothing it should treat it as if they didn't exist though afaik.
But why are these keys hardcoded therefore forced ?the_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20 You can't remove any prefs that are included in the browser, so that's just standard Firefox behavior.
But why are these keys hardcoded therefore forced ?the_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20 You can't remove any prefs that are included in the browser, so that's just standard Firefox behavior.
If one's really determinedthe_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20
You can't remove any prefs that are included in the browser, so that's just standard Firefox behavior.
If one's really determinedthe_r3dacted wrote: ↑26 Jul 2026, 00:20
You can't remove any prefs that are included in the browser, so that's just standard Firefox behavior.
Thanks for the tip. But it would be much easier to have these keys in config.cfg so you can quickly delete or edit the ones you want.GoodConscience wrote: ↑27 Jul 2026, 20:41 there still is a way, but it involves messing with omni.ja archives
Thanks for the tip. But it would be much easier to have these keys in config.cfg so you can quickly delete or edit the ones you want.GoodConscience wrote: ↑27 Jul 2026, 20:41 there still is a way, but it involves messing with omni.ja archives
I've been thinking about removing that code because it adds complexity and requires reverting optimizations done to the browser code all for dynamic runtime OS spoofing. I should just fake 10 for those picky sites.Duke wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 03:57 Because %OS_SLICE% returns Windows 7 or 8 which is not coherent with any version > 115. This may cause problems, check this:
https://board.eclipse.cx/viewtopic.php?p=9148#p9148
lol you should see the GitHub issue lol]]>The-10-Pen wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 05:03Totally agreed!Duke wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 03:57 Because I have an account on some of these sites for years, and I don't want my user agent to appear with the F word in it.
Because %OS_SLICE% returns Windows 7 or 8 which is not coherent with any version > 115. This may cause problems, check this:
https://board.eclipse.cx/viewtopic.php?p=9148#p9148
Because I see no reason why I should be forced to use these keys. Actually it's a PITA to have to edit these user agents, one by one, each time a new version of R3dfox is released.
I was not familiar with the referenced "keys", but Holy Shit, Batman!
UA's with the F word is SO D@MN **CHILDISH**, thanks for the heads-up that SH!T like that is being hardcoded !!!
I've been thinking about removing that code because it adds complexity and requires reverting optimizations done to the browser code all for dynamic runtime OS spoofing. I should just fake 10 for those picky sites.Duke wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 03:57 Because %OS_SLICE% returns Windows 7 or 8 which is not coherent with any version > 115. This may cause problems, check this:
https://board.eclipse.cx/viewtopic.php?p=9148#p9148
lol you should see the GitHub issue lol]]>The-10-Pen wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 05:03Totally agreed!Duke wrote: ↑28 Jul 2026, 03:57 Because I have an account on some of these sites for years, and I don't want my user agent to appear with the F word in it.
Because %OS_SLICE% returns Windows 7 or 8 which is not coherent with any version > 115. This may cause problems, check this:
https://board.eclipse.cx/viewtopic.php?p=9148#p9148
Because I see no reason why I should be forced to use these keys. Actually it's a PITA to have to edit these user agents, one by one, each time a new version of R3dfox is released.
I was not familiar with the referenced "keys", but Holy Shit, Batman!
UA's with the F word is SO D@MN **CHILDISH**, thanks for the heads-up that SH!T like that is being hardcoded !!!
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
On my Windows 3.11 VM with Win32s and WinG I'm getting a Win32s - Error: Invalid format.Heathercat123 wrote: ↑21 Jul 2026, 14:27 On Windows 3.1 with win32s, it just doesn't launch for some reason.
On my Windows 3.11 VM with Win32s and WinG I'm getting a Win32s - Error: Invalid format.Heathercat123 wrote: ↑21 Jul 2026, 14:27 On Windows 3.1 with win32s, it just doesn't launch for some reason.
is it possible to build dactyloidae with gtk2?wuggy wrote: ↑27 Jul 2026, 00:36 https://repo.dactyloidae.xyz/Dactyloidae/UXP/releases/tag/13.2
Dactyloidae 13.2 for Windows 2000 and above and Linux for x86_64 or LoongArch64 is finally here, after 3 months of development
is it possible to build dactyloidae with gtk2?wuggy wrote: ↑27 Jul 2026, 00:36 https://repo.dactyloidae.xyz/Dactyloidae/UXP/releases/tag/13.2
Dactyloidae 13.2 for Windows 2000 and above and Linux for x86_64 or LoongArch64 is finally here, after 3 months of development
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
]]>
]]>Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Attachments
Good idea, that's always better than staying in front of a computer 16 hours a day
Same, I'll fully go the Linux way sooner or later but surely not the Windows 11 route.]]>
Good idea, that's always better than staying in front of a computer 16 hours a day
Same, I'll fully go the Linux way sooner or later but surely not the Windows 11 route.]]>