Man
Professional
- Messages
- 2,965
- Reaction score
- 488
- Points
- 83
It's been a while since there have been any articles, but since I recently had a chance to delve a little deeper into testing new antidetects, I decided to describe for you in more detail what's what, and what all these webgls and other bullshit that you can turn on and off are responsible for. For those who have been working with all this for a long time, the article may seem obvious, but don't forget that there are those subscribers who don't understand "what reverse ach is", so, why bother explaining - let's begin.
User agent - in general, everything is trivially simple, if you install a user agent that differs from your browser version (be it Chromium in most antidetects, or Firefox in some Adspower), then you are sent to hell; if you install another OS (not the one that is based on) - then you are also sent to hell, because the trivial difference in fonts is visible. You can check this even on pixelscan.net, which, by the way, is not a special indicator of the trustworthiness of the setting. Why? Because all modern antidetects (even the Dolphin) are sawed with the expectation of screwing it, although in fact they screw only you, because you are the one paying for their bullshit.
Let's move on to the rest of the prints, which are a bit more complicated.
WebGL/WebGL info (WebGPU) - this parameter, if we move away from working with antifraud, is used by sites to determine your video card for the correct processing of those elements of the site that are processed directly on your device. And if we take our native - beloved antifraud, then one thing is important to us - that the WebGL information (in simple terms - the displayed name of the video card) matches its fingerprint. Even Google checks this when working with it, so if you work with logs - it is better to turn on the substitution, even if in the absolute majority of antidetects this is noise, but if you compare it with other parameters.
AudioContext - the same, only with an audio card/microphone. In general, this fingerprint is shitty everywhere now, so when working with antidetect, this parameter can theoretically give you away and interfere with successful work, but in practice - no one gives a shit, and if you take everyone's favorite bank Chase, it doesn't know anything except WebGl, so if you can't detect it - look towards the information base and straightening your arms. Ahem, in general, it's better not to touch this parameter at all - crooked noises will give you away more than a real fingerprint.
ClientRects is a parameter used to determine how to arrange page elements in the browser. It directly depends on the display resolution and window size, so if you work with the log and need to change it, it's better to turn it on, otherwise you'll be caught and you won't see half of the pages. But again, it's better to play with this parameter before working with antidetect - there's a chance that it replaces it incredibly crookedly.
Canvas is a system imprint that consists of fonts/browser version (that's why left user agents get caught), and other bullshit that describes your system as a whole. There's nothing to talk about, but if canvas is noise, then when registering banks, for example, it will send you to hell. And Google, for example, doesn't give a shit about it.
So how can you check the adequacy of these parameters? In short, as I already said, all checkers are lying because antidetects are guided by them. But there is one checker - CreepJS on GitHub, which you can't really screw over (at least for now). So, the original device in a clean browser window has a trust indicator of about 65. And how to work with substitutions - depends on the purpose of your work, but I think the essence is clear. It is also worth looking at Frequency Check on pixel scan - if you have a too unique parameter ("no data") - then this is noise, because the fingerprints of the same devices are absolutely identical, which means it definitely cannot be unique. There is also the AmIUnique website, but sometimes it gives out such crap that even a salted middleman who steals your dollars will seem super adequate.
Important - when working with these sites, never continue working in the same profile, make a clone of it, because these sites hang fraudulent cookies on you and thus you won't notice or work.
In short, this is how we live. I wanted to publish a similar article for a long time, but I never got around to it, because it is much more interesting to post VCCs that are already registering. Easy registrations and tight cash-outs to everyone. Peace.
User agent - in general, everything is trivially simple, if you install a user agent that differs from your browser version (be it Chromium in most antidetects, or Firefox in some Adspower), then you are sent to hell; if you install another OS (not the one that is based on) - then you are also sent to hell, because the trivial difference in fonts is visible. You can check this even on pixelscan.net, which, by the way, is not a special indicator of the trustworthiness of the setting. Why? Because all modern antidetects (even the Dolphin) are sawed with the expectation of screwing it, although in fact they screw only you, because you are the one paying for their bullshit.
Let's move on to the rest of the prints, which are a bit more complicated.
WebGL/WebGL info (WebGPU) - this parameter, if we move away from working with antifraud, is used by sites to determine your video card for the correct processing of those elements of the site that are processed directly on your device. And if we take our native - beloved antifraud, then one thing is important to us - that the WebGL information (in simple terms - the displayed name of the video card) matches its fingerprint. Even Google checks this when working with it, so if you work with logs - it is better to turn on the substitution, even if in the absolute majority of antidetects this is noise, but if you compare it with other parameters.
AudioContext - the same, only with an audio card/microphone. In general, this fingerprint is shitty everywhere now, so when working with antidetect, this parameter can theoretically give you away and interfere with successful work, but in practice - no one gives a shit, and if you take everyone's favorite bank Chase, it doesn't know anything except WebGl, so if you can't detect it - look towards the information base and straightening your arms. Ahem, in general, it's better not to touch this parameter at all - crooked noises will give you away more than a real fingerprint.
ClientRects is a parameter used to determine how to arrange page elements in the browser. It directly depends on the display resolution and window size, so if you work with the log and need to change it, it's better to turn it on, otherwise you'll be caught and you won't see half of the pages. But again, it's better to play with this parameter before working with antidetect - there's a chance that it replaces it incredibly crookedly.
Canvas is a system imprint that consists of fonts/browser version (that's why left user agents get caught), and other bullshit that describes your system as a whole. There's nothing to talk about, but if canvas is noise, then when registering banks, for example, it will send you to hell. And Google, for example, doesn't give a shit about it.
So how can you check the adequacy of these parameters? In short, as I already said, all checkers are lying because antidetects are guided by them. But there is one checker - CreepJS on GitHub, which you can't really screw over (at least for now). So, the original device in a clean browser window has a trust indicator of about 65. And how to work with substitutions - depends on the purpose of your work, but I think the essence is clear. It is also worth looking at Frequency Check on pixel scan - if you have a too unique parameter ("no data") - then this is noise, because the fingerprints of the same devices are absolutely identical, which means it definitely cannot be unique. There is also the AmIUnique website, but sometimes it gives out such crap that even a salted middleman who steals your dollars will seem super adequate.
Important - when working with these sites, never continue working in the same profile, make a clone of it, because these sites hang fraudulent cookies on you and thus you won't notice or work.
In short, this is how we live. I wanted to publish a similar article for a long time, but I never got around to it, because it is much more interesting to post VCCs that are already registering. Easy registrations and tight cash-outs to everyone. Peace.
