You mean my personal and providers IP-adress. Besides FF VPN (in that case) I use of course FF anti-fingerprinting and FF anti-tracking. No site breakage.Well it hides your VPN
You mean my personal and providers IP-adress. Besides FF VPN (in that case) I use of course FF anti-fingerprinting and FF anti-tracking. No site breakage.Well it hides your VPN
Well FF, Edge and Brave antifinger tracking look for well known fingerprint libraries and I when FF does not break NY Times it probably is mild protection. You could add JShelter to firefox and enable the same protections as with Privacy Inspector when JShelter block something, than FF anti-fingerprinting does what I think it does.You mean my personal and providers IP-adress. Besides FF VPN (in that case) I use of course FF anti-fingerprinting and FF anti-tracking. No site breakage.
I agree. And you and I have the disadvantage that we live in a small country. Even that makes us fingerprintable. But I wouldn't change with any other country.No anti-fingerprinting can compensate for the anonymity of the herd
May I come and live there?But I wouldn't change with any other country.![]()
When you fancy 150 rainy days a year, then the country of Beer, Bitterballs and Brothels is the place to be, but be ware:May I come and live there?![]()
And everybody walks on wooden shoes.the country of Beer, Bitterballs and Brothels is the place to be
While the extension is open source, the underlying data base has IP right limitations.Use Ghostery's WhoTracks.me feature, “Popular Websites with the Most Tracking.”
WhoTracks.Me
The websites listed have many trackers, so it's easy to see if the extension blocks all of them and/or if, in your case, other defenses,such as DNS-level blocking,are also kicking in first.
It's easy to check if, when you disable DNS blocking, the same tracker is still blocked by the extension.
While the extension is open source, the underlying data base IP right limitations.
So far (without extended testing) this feature didn't cause problems. FYI: I don't use uBol-stripped together with 3P-Matrix-lite. I simulated (a part of) the latter by the rule you well know: *^$script,subdocument,third-party,to=~be|~com|~de|~dev|~eu|~inf|~io|~ms|~net|~nl|~org|~uk|~us|~videoI only added third-party for advanced users, but will remove that option as soon as I get complaints that this feature breaks websites for which they did not write custom rules for
I have noted it Jan, thxSo far (without extended testing) this feature didn't cause problems. FYI: I don't use uBol-stripped together with 3P-Matrix-lite. I simulated (a part of) the latter by the rule you well know: *^$script,subdocument,third-party,to=~be|~com|~de|~dev|~eu|~inf|~io|~ms|~net|~nl|~org|~uk|~us|~video
Did you notice my wish for scrolling in the small window of Scriptlet reference?
zero overlap, they complement each other, but using a clean separate profile is a good approach (also safer against snooping)For webshops etc. I use in Edge a separate profile without any ad-/tracker blokking extension. My impression (not more as that because I didn't record it) is that 3P-Matrix-lite has some overlap with uBol-stripped. So now I can explore the full potention of uBol-stripped.

