# Mullvad browser fingerprint **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-browser-fingerprint/22931 **Category:** Questions **Tags:** browsers **Created:** 2024-12-04T14:48:30Z **Posts:** 33 ## Post 1 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T14:48:30Z Last week when I was using mullvad browser and I went to this site “[fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com)” all I had to do was start a new session and it would give me a new score so it couldn’t know that I was the same person, but now I have to change ip otherwise it knows directly that I’m the same visitor as hiers whereas on my Firefox for example it’s unable to know who I am. Is this a bug in my mullvad browser, or did I accidentally touch the settings, or maybe a poorly controlled update? ![2024-12-03_16-06](//forum-uploads.privacyguidesusercontent.com/original/2X/5/5daa9a84e8bccdad0217bf37deacc24071b90292.png) --- ## Post 2 by @fria — 2024-12-04T14:50:54Z They’re always improving their product, it could just be that they found some new fingerprinting method or they could just be going off your ip. To me, the fact that it changes when you change IPs is a good sign. --- ## Post 3 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T14:52:34Z The problem is that on my Firefox I don’t need to change my ip for the ID to be changed, I just need to close my browser and open it for a new code to be provided and on my mullvad I can’t do anything about it. That’s a problem, isn’t it? --- ## Post 4 by @fria — 2024-12-04T15:31:41Z I know that Firefox has some fingerprint randomization built in, I’m not sure if tor browser uses that. They might have that disabled, or there might be something in their script that detects the randomization in tor browser (which mullvad is based on) and ignores those values. I don’t think it’s something to be concerned about since you’re getting a different fingerprint for different IPs. --- ## Post 5 by @anon80779245 — 2024-12-04T15:41:49Z This could be from many factors not relevant to the browser. --- ## Post 6 by @ruihildt — 2024-12-04T15:44:03Z See: [Brave is NOT fingerprint resistant enough - #26 by ruihildt](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/brave-is-not-fingerprint-resistant-enough/22775/26) --- ## Post 7 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T15:45:47Z So it’s not just a problem for me? Have you tried using mullvad browser and the [fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com) website and tested with a new ID? --- ## Post 8 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T15:46:21Z > [@anon80779245](#): > > This could be from many factors not relevant to the browser. I’ll take a look --- ## Post 9 by @Astatine — 2024-12-04T16:10:56Z Why aren’t you informing the OP that these fingerprinting websites are flawed? This has been [spoken](https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/browser-tracking.html#fingerprint-testing-websites) [about](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-brave-on-android-actually-much-worse-than-cromite-at-fingerprinting-resistance/20154/2) [countless](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-dns-based-ad-blocking-fingerprintable/22914/5) [times](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/should-i-use-ublocks-medium-mode-on-mullvad-browser/15018/16), [becoming](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-browsers-fingerprint-is-different-than-tor-browsers/16278/6) [exhausting](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-browsers-fingerprint-is-different-than-tor-browsers/16278/8) [to](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/testing-the-fingerprintablility-of-a-few-different-browsers-in-a-few-different-standard-configurations/15044/3) [clarify](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-brave-on-android-actually-much-worse-than-cromite-at-fingerprinting-resistance/20154/11). --- ## Post 10 by @Astatine — 2024-12-04T16:16:37Z > [@fria](#): > > I’m not sure if tor browser uses that. No, Tor Browser [does](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/question-regarding-arkenfox/18898/4) use RFP. > [@fria](#): > > I know that Firefox has some fingerprint randomization built in If you mean Firefox’s _defaults,_ then yes FPP is used, although it _can_ use RFP when enabled in the about:config. --- ## Post 11 by @fria — 2024-12-04T16:16:42Z [Fingerprint.com](http://Fingerprint.com) is a widely used service so the arguments against cover your tracks don’t apply, being that it has a smaller user base. --- ## Post 12 by @fria — 2024-12-04T16:17:40Z > [@Astatine](#): > > No, Tor Browser [does](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/question-regarding-arkenfox/18898/4) use RFP. I’m aware I just didn’t remember if RFP randomized anything. --- ## Post 13 by @Astatine — 2024-12-04T16:17:55Z Did you read everything, especially [this](https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/browser-tracking.html#fingerprint-testing-websites)? :slight_smile: --- ## Post 14 by @fria — 2024-12-04T16:19:34Z > These websites determine the uniqueness of your fingerprint based off of their own userbase, which will miss out on the majority of real users, thereby providing inaccurate statistics and is not a viable way of determining how well you fair off against fingerprinting in the real world. Yes, it seems like _you_ haven’t read it. [Fingerprint.com](http://Fingerprint.com) is a service used in the wild with a massive database of real users. I’m sure there’s other arguments against testing your browser fingerprint this way but that specific one doesn’t work here. --- ## Post 15 by @Astatine — 2024-12-04T16:35:16Z Oh, I [_see_](https://dev.fingerprint.com/docs/introduction), and thanks for clarifying. I should’ve looked at the website _first_, _then_ respond, but I did otherwise and jumped in with multiple links :sweat_smile:. --- ## Post 16 by @SteveR — 2024-12-04T17:18:43Z > Why aren’t you informing the OP that these fingerprinting websites are flawed? This has been [spoken](https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/browser-tracking.html#fingerprint-testing-websites) [about](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-brave-on-android-actually-much-worse-than-cromite-at-fingerprinting-resistance/20154/2) [countless](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-dns-based-ad-blocking-fingerprintable/22914/5) [times](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/should-i-use-ublocks-medium-mode-on-mullvad-browser/15018/16), [becoming](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-browsers-fingerprint-is-different-than-tor-browsers/16278/6) [exhausting](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-browsers-fingerprint-is-different-than-tor-browsers/16278/8) [to](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/testing-the-fingerprintablility-of-a-few-different-browsers-in-a-few-different-standard-configurations/15044/3) [clarify](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/is-brave-on-android-actually-much-worse-than-cromite-at-fingerprinting-resistance/20154/11). You are right, of course. But it feels like it is so hard to find up-to-date trustworthy information on fingerprinting and the various defences that I can understand people (including myself) being tempted to rely on these (at best) imperfect fingerprinting test websites. There is a lot of information scattered around (in this forum as well as the broader web) but in general it is hard to know whether someone is correct in what they say. (I found your links helpful because they were effectively vouching for those posts and thus I felt I could trust them.) Probably because it comes up so often, people I respect as having expertise in this area often seem to respond in cryptic or curt ways because they are sick of explaining this, but that doesn’t help when I read their posts in isolation. A lot of the general web content on fingerprinting also omits a lot of technical detail to try to make the concept intelligible to a casual reader - which is laudable, but speaking personally I want to understand things at a reasonably technical level so I can form a good mental model and reason about the problem myself when considering possible defences and what I can/must accept as inevitable. I have seen mention of Privacy Guides creating a FAQ or some sort of resource on fingerprinting. It would be brilliant if PG could produce something authoritative which explains all the relevant concepts and issues in depth. I appreciate everyone’s time is limited, but honestly this is the thing I would most like to see in terms of PG site development. I appreciate and use both Mullvad Browser and Tor Browser, but for various reasons they aren’t always practical options, so I am very interested in evaluating the risks to my privacy of using other browsers. --- ## Post 17 by @Astatine — 2024-12-04T17:28:08Z > [@SteveR](#): > > I have seen mention of Privacy Guides creating a FAQ or some sort of resource on fingerprinting. It would be brilliant if PG could produce something authoritative which explains all the relevant concepts and issues in depth. I appreciate everyone’s time is limited, but honestly this is the thing I would most like to see in terms of PG site development. I believe you mean [this](https://github.com/privacyguides/privacyguides.org/pull/2119) Fingerprinting Overview. AFAIK, work on it abruptly stopped for no apparent reason. --- ## Post 18 by @SteveR — 2024-12-04T17:29:42Z That looks familiar and is probably it, thanks. --- ## Post 19 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T18:44:04Z I understand fingerprint much better but I don’t think it fixes my problem. You say here that mullvad browser is excellent and I agree with that but recently I had some problems that I don’t have with brave like the fact that if I close my brave and start it again it gives me a different token which is not the case with mullvad browser I’m talking about “[fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com)” here. --- ## Post 20 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T18:45:45Z Ok, I think I understand better now, but if my browser doesn’t even pass this kind of site, it’s really bad, isn’t it? --- ## Post 21 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-04T18:47:30Z So I’m not in the wrong I do well to look on this kind of site to know if my browser and configure well? --- ## Post 22 by @sha123 — 2024-12-05T09:13:00Z > [@fria](#): > > [Fingerprint.com](http://Fingerprint.com) is a widely used service so the arguments against cover your tracks don’t apply, being that it has a smaller user base They do apply. Also [fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com) has its own share of additional problems, for example misleading users by using non-fingerprinting metrics to re-recognize users. --- ## Post 23 by @sha123 — 2024-12-05T09:15:28Z > [@AbanGEnt](#): > > You say here that mullvad browser is excellent and I agree with that but recently I had some problems that I don’t have with brave like the fact that if I close my brave and start it again it gives me a different token which is not the case with mullvad browser I’m talking about “[fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com)” here. It is excellent, much better than Brave’s. You don’t know how to interpret results of testing sites, because you lack knowledge about fingerprinting. > [@AbanGEnt](#): > > I understand fingerprint much better but I don’t think it fixes my problem. Well, … --- ## Post 24 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-05T15:48:55Z But do we agree that if fingerprint recognizes me, it’s a problem no matter what? --- ## Post 25 by @sha123 — 2024-12-05T16:06:38Z Only if it (at least almost) uniquely recognizes you and that’s something no test site can reliably tell you. Mullvad and Tor Browser’s strength is that you look like many other users, as long as you haven’t tampered with (hidden) settings. --- ## Post 26 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-05T16:16:44Z But it recognizes me perfectly, go to the site and it gives you a token and when I restart the session it gives me back the exact same token so I’m identified. --- ## Post 27 by @sha123 — 2024-12-05T16:21:33Z Emphasis in my comment was on **uniquely** , and that’s something test websites can’t tell you for the general browser population. --- ## Post 28 by @JohnDose — 2024-12-06T05:27:47Z Same issue here. I’ve been using Mullvad browser for quite some time, and also regularly tested my fingerprint with that site([fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com)). Previously, [fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com) wasn’t able to recognize me when Mullvad browser was simply restarted. But a few days ago, the visitor ID did not change even after closing and restarting the browser. To me, it turns out that the site utilizes the browser screen resolution. When restarting the browser and changing the resolution, [fingerprint.com](http://fingerprint.com) did not recongize me despite the same IP address. However, when maintaining the same screen size between browsing sections (eg. default size or full screen), the visitor ID did not change. --- ## Post 29 by @sha123 — 2024-12-06T09:51:40Z > [@JohnDose](#): > > Same issue here. Let me repeat: It is not an issue. --- ## Post 30 by @AbanGEnt — 2024-12-12T02:52:56Z I thought it wasn’t advisable to change the browser size --- ## Post 31 by @ruihildt — 2024-12-12T14:22:08Z No, letterboxing is there to hide your true page content size. --- ## Post 33 by @anon59300808 — 2026-03-21T08:18:36Z Trash ad site. It used to work, but now the ID is tied to the IP, so you have to change your IP along with the browser session.