WARNING Comodo Dragon leaks critical Fingerprints!

Comodo Dragon - CD Help - CD
#1

Yes, if you all thought that Dragon was a safe and totally leak-free browser then I can tell you that
this wrong.

We all know how cockies are constantly used to monitor our internet usage, but they do not only use cookies to monitor and identify you, they also use browser fingerprints. And when you run the test at “panopticlick” it is quite frightening how much browsers are leaking, Dragon still leak least fingerprints, compared to FF and Opera. Opera Leaks by far the most Fingerprints.

You can run the test and see what browser fingerprints that leaks for you.

What I can conclude, Comodo Dragon leaks a lot of personal/unique trackable information about your browser and software/hardware.

Dragon is still better then firefox and opera 10.5
But I see this as an serious threat against our privacy. In my case it did leak information regarding certain hardware I had installed…and a lot of software.

Basically what this means is that every site you visit, you will leave an unique and traceable “fingerprint”.
And until Dragon has fixed this serious security flaw I will consider Dragon to be unsafe to use. That you leave tracable/personal fingerprints on every site you use is very serious, I think no one can disagree about that, and I hope Comodo as security company understand the seriousness of this, and will fix this in future versions.

If you fix this there is a real benefit to use Dragon as browser compared to Chrome, cause then Dragon would give real security not false-security. In fact if you fix this, you are like it seem to be the only browser that does not leak this kind of fingerprints.

#2

The fingerprint alone is not sufficiently “unique”:

As far the information https://panopticlick.eff.org/ provided indicated that with a reference value of 18.1 bits overall 286,777 browsers that visited their site will share the same fingerprint.

In A Primer on Information Theory and Privacy they indicated that 33 bits of entropy would be necessary to identify a random, unknown person but they did not explicitly suggest what amount of bits would be necessary for browser fingerprinting in order to identify a random, unknown person on any site (Global Uniqueness)

Singling out a specific browser strikes as unreasonable even more when all browsers are similarly liable to such technique out of compliance to existing standards.

Whereas fingerprinting leverages on informations that browsers are supposed to relay out of compliance to existing standards IIRC I also read about the advice to disable javascript when fingerprinting is actually a concern