Eclipse Community

https://github.com/Blaukovitch/Mozilla_Firefox_Windows_7
https://github.com/Blaukovitch/GOOGLE_CHROME_Windows_7
https://github.com/Blaukovitch/GOOGLE_CHROME_Windows_7/releases/tag/discord/

It looks like some makeshift job made with hacked libraries, they are not built from the source.
I prefer to use R3dfox or Supermium for Chrome lovers

I've *never* been a fan of tweaking one fingerprint by REPLACING IT with another fingerprint.
The whole "F...YouGoogle" client data is nothing but a STANDS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB FINGERPRINT.
One really is better served with a "faked popular" fingerprint than one like this.
All this fingerprint does is "tie you together", lump sum, with any "criminal elements" using the same exact fingerprint.
So you had better cross your fingers that the "criminal element" isn't using the same ISP (probably a safe assumption, but why risk it?).

Erm, not sure what you are on about with this fingerprint thing

Duke wrote: *

30 Nov 2025, 22:55

Erm, not sure what you are on about with this fingerprint thing

Those that want to know already do know or research on their own accord.
aka, too long of an explanation for herein.

The-10-Pen wrote: *

30 Nov 2025, 15:35

...a "faked popular" fingerprint...

I'm not sure I'm understanding this one ... please forgive my ignorance

Isn't FireFox already too unique and could easily be compare to somebody using TOR?

If you afraid of "fingerprinting" you may use alternatives. I'd rather use Tor or VPN for better anonimity. I've just pasted this for informational/educational purposes only (for legal activity, daily usage or experimenting).

As luk3Z pointed out, the first-post links are for info/edu purposes only.

I assumed all would already "know" the fingerprinting aspect of my comment.
But since it appears to have caused confusion, I shall add additional INFORMATIONAL/EDUCATIONAL details.
I shall attempt to keep it "short" and not "TL;DR" (ie, "Too Long, Didn't Read").
I'd prefer to think that if I take the TIME to detail, that my time isn't WASTED by others NOT READING.
But it's going to be over the head of those that live life in very short attention span "tweetlike" universes.

1)
Majority herein tend to be Firefox (or fork) users.
The first-post cites Firefox *AND* Chrome - it's even in the title of the thread.

2)
My comment was in regards the #2 link - ie, Blaukovitch/GOOGLE_CHROME_Windows_7.

3)
If you read through that link, you will find this - 4)
My comment was tied to the X-Client-Data childish childish CHILDISH coding !!!

5)
Dig into the most minor of forensic science and what comprises a "fingerprint".
The tip of your finger's "fingerprint" is not ONE data point (look up the term "minutiae points").

6)
Web browsers (ALL, including both Firefox and Chrome) can be identified by the web sites that you visit.
X-Client-Data (and Client Hints in general) is but ONE, I repeat for those in the back row, *ONE* "data point".
Chrome has its minutiae points.
Firefox has its minutiae points.
They are not the same. They do not need to be.
A minutiae point is a minutiae point is a minutiae point is a minutiae point.
You only need "so many" minutiae points.

7)
Blocking/Faking Client Hints (of which X-Client-Data is but a SUBSET OF) does not remove your fingerprint.
It only removes *ONE* minutiae point.

8)
But in this case, it didn't even "remove it".
No! Rather, it turned it into a giant Bat Signal in the sky!
A strobe light flashing at the discoteque!
And turned *ONE* minutiae point spanning however many hundreds/thousands in the userbase to be IDENTICAL.
It's like telling *ALL* criminals in your town to paint their house PURPLE so that the police can start with a narrowed-down search field.


* No offense to anyone living in a purple house.