Epic fail resistance 2 or why you should not get involved in privacy with FireFox plugins

Good time reading, dear readers of Habr.

Attached to Big Data resistance 1 and Epic fail resistance 1

A very short note about two nuances.

Having overlaid with all this knowledge and plug-ins, including the substitution of prints, we do not always take into account or then forget that, apart from “ordinary” sites, for which information about us is obviously superfluous, we visit, at least sometimes, payment systems, where “verification” is more serious.
')
Examples:

1. The uniqueness of prints. Prints will almost always be unique when they are replaced. This is also an imprint. Replace imprint.
2. Comparison Substitution Canvas and WebGL - will be different (ie, the process of drawing). And this is a “subtle, but unequivocal, hint” of substitution, which not only users use for privatization purposes, but also fraudsters.

The offer is that all these browser plug-ins, such as CanvasBlocker, are also gradually being improved, but, IMHO, we use payment systems to make it to the white list, just in case, to exclude the possibility of additional checks. And do not forget that these plugins are installed, in the case of "online banking / shopping" is not from the list.

Sources :

How does the antifraud system work (IMHO - there is interesting information)
Anti-fraud systems and how they work (general information)

NDA ... The note turned into grab bags, Sat arrived)))

PS The article implied that fingerprinting is detected, although, if no serious violations were committed, then they can (and not always) ask for extra confirmation, etc. Plus - fingerprinting will somewhat affect the level of trust and you will receive a little more careful attention.

Otherwise, regarding the Security Council - I propose to draw attention to the competent and detailed user comments below, especially to the mm3 comment .