On a dual boot system, win 8 and 7, If I change to win7 does that make my
system and/or browser less subject to profiling or ID'ing than what I was
using under the other os win 8?

On 9/10/2022 9:04 PM, sumbuddy wrote:
> On a dual boot system, win 8 and 7, If I change to win7 does that make my
> system and/or browser less subject to profiling or ID'ing than what I was
> using under the other os win 8?
>

Well, there's bound to be unsubstantiated rumors about
such things, that's for sure.

It could be that Windows 7 had this:

"Customer Experience Improvement Program, a Microsoft customer-experience management
initiative, also known as SQM (Software Quality Metrics)"

A developer could place a logging system in an application,
reporting how much RAM was used in each session, and whether
the program crashed or not. And this would use CEIP for communicating
it and centrally recording the details. The developer would later
log into a Microsoft account, and get a summary.

Microsoft ICE was done that way. The program collected statistics.
The only problem was, the developers had already moved on, and
the collected info "went no-where fast". Nobody was improving the
program, based on all the statistics uploaded.

Firefox has a custom system, doing all the same things, only the
logs are sent directly to Mozilla and Microsoft cannot peek at them :-)
The about:memory summary might be uploaded to Mozilla.

That's an example of how much "overreach" Windows 7 might have. Not
too much.

Windows 8 had Cortana, and likely logs words you type into "any"
search box. While it is fun to pretend they have a key logger
and recorded your passwords, I doubt any scheme went quite that far.

In the case of "special studies", like the gestures that Windows 8
touch might support, they might log coordinates returned by the
interface, as a means to interpret whether customers got stuff
to work, or the customers were struggling. The special studies, A/B
studies, don't necessarily last that long. Mozilla does special studies too.

I consider W7 and W8 as "safe" by my measure of security,
whereas W10 and W11, I try not to do anything which allowed
observation. I will only plug my GPS module into Windows XP.
The PNP subsystem might rat me out, in later OSes. If the PNP
system can detect a "serial mouse", it can detect anything.

The ETW subsystem, has the ability to record packets. And recently,
Process Monitor had parsing of the packets added, so the actual user
can benefit from the trace. The thing is, ETW traces are collected
for a whole bunch of stuff, then summaries are generated later
with the data. And this allows discovering things, without
using a "key logger", as ETW "logs everything" :-) ETW is one
of the positive things that Windows has, that Linux does not.

ETW works all the way back to WinXP by the way.

Since ETW is a firehose, it would be pretty hard to collect "everything"
and upload it. The ETW trace is surprisingly compressible though, so while
you could have 3GB of raw trace, to upload it, it might be 20x smaller
when compressed. ETW, if fully engaged (all the options turned on),
slows down the system.

Summary: W7 and W8 are interchangeable and "roughly the same class".
W7 is better at screen recording and Zoom sessions maybe.

W10 and W11, deserve a moments meditation, before boot up :-)
I watch the LEDs on my router, and am on the lookout for
sneaky Metro App updates and so on. On occasion, if I see
enough DoSVC or BITS activity, I may even elect to boot into
something else. It depends on, to what degree, you piss
me off with the shenanigans.

Not everyone here would trust W8, but I would use it if
I needed to run a backup of some other disk, or if I thought
my W7 was infected or something.

Paul

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in news:tfjf0h$1n8gk$1@dont-email.me:

> On 9/10/2022 9:04 PM, sumbuddy wrote:
>> On a dual boot system, win 8 and 7, If I change to win7 does that
>> make my system and/or browser less subject to profiling or ID'ing
>> than what I was using under the other os win 8?
>>
>
> Well, there's bound to be unsubstantiated rumors about
> such things, that's for sure.
>
> It could be that Windows 7 had this:
>
> "Customer Experience Improvement Program, a Microsoft
> customer-experience management
> initiative, also known as SQM (Software Quality Metrics)"
>
> A developer could place a logging system in an application,
> reporting how much RAM was used in each session, and whether
> the program crashed or not. And this would use CEIP for communicating
> it and centrally recording the details. The developer would later
> log into a Microsoft account, and get a summary.
>
> Microsoft ICE was done that way. The program collected statistics.
> The only problem was, the developers had already moved on, and
> the collected info "went no-where fast". Nobody was improving the
> program, based on all the statistics uploaded.
>
> Firefox has a custom system, doing all the same things, only the
> logs are sent directly to Mozilla and Microsoft cannot peek at them
> :-) The about:memory summary might be uploaded to Mozilla.
>
> That's an example of how much "overreach" Windows 7 might have. Not
> too much.
>
> Windows 8 had Cortana, and likely logs words you type into "any"
> search box. While it is fun to pretend they have a key logger
> and recorded your passwords, I doubt any scheme went quite that far.
>
> In the case of "special studies", like the gestures that Windows 8
> touch might support, they might log coordinates returned by the
> interface, as a means to interpret whether customers got stuff
> to work, or the customers were struggling. The special studies, A/B
> studies, don't necessarily last that long. Mozilla does special
> studies too.
>
> I consider W7 and W8 as "safe" by my measure of security,
> whereas W10 and W11, I try not to do anything which allowed
> observation. I will only plug my GPS module into Windows XP.
> The PNP subsystem might rat me out, in later OSes. If the PNP
> system can detect a "serial mouse", it can detect anything.
>
> The ETW subsystem, has the ability to record packets. And recently,
> Process Monitor had parsing of the packets added, so the actual user
> can benefit from the trace. The thing is, ETW traces are collected
> for a whole bunch of stuff, then summaries are generated later
> with the data. And this allows discovering things, without
> using a "key logger", as ETW "logs everything" :-) ETW is one
> of the positive things that Windows has, that Linux does not.
>
> ETW works all the way back to WinXP by the way.
>
> Since ETW is a firehose, it would be pretty hard to collect
> "everything" and upload it. The ETW trace is surprisingly compressible
> though, so while you could have 3GB of raw trace, to upload it, it
> might be 20x smaller when compressed. ETW, if fully engaged (all the
> options turned on), slows down the system.
>
> Summary: W7 and W8 are interchangeable and "roughly the same class".
> W7 is better at screen recording and Zoom sessions maybe.
>
> W10 and W11, deserve a moments meditation, before boot up
> :-) I watch the LEDs on my router, and am on the lookout for
> sneaky Metro App updates and so on. On occasion, if I see
> enough DoSVC or BITS activity, I may even elect to boot into
> something else. It depends on, to what degree, you piss
> me off with the shenanigans.
>
> Not everyone here would trust W8, but I would use it if
> I needed to run a backup of some other disk, or if I thought
> my W7 was infected or something.
>
> Paul
>
>

Thanks for the reply Paul, but I am at a loss as to exactly how this
relates to the question of a website profiling your browser across two
different operating systems especially if you're using Virtual box as
the boot medium?

On 9/15/2022 10:31 PM, sumbuddy wrote:

>
> Thanks for the reply Paul, but I am at a loss as to exactly how this
> relates to the question of a website profiling your browser across two
> different operating systems especially if you're using Virtual box as
> the boot medium?

Sorry, I thought you were worried about Microsoft snooping on you.

The browser has little in the way of OS context. It has the UserAgent
string. With the Win NT number (5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3).

Some of the subsystems may be observable with about:support, but this
is not information which is exported to mere websites. If a video
they want you to see, won't play, they may be able to figure out
the OS doesn't have DXVA2, and thus, you're on Windows XP. But since
the UserAgent string gave that away (as 5.1), it's not exactly
a secret what OS you're on.

Maybe font sniffing would show a difference. But again, they know your
OS, so guessing your OS using font fingerprint is silly.

That's why it would not have occurred to me, to be expecting
the browser to behave differently from that perspective.

If you customize the fonts, which changes the results of some
fingerprinting code, then that's not the fault of the OS.
That's a user-inspired change.

If your UserAgent did not give away the OS version, then
we could pretend to be worried about the OS-caused differences.
But what they can conclude from those differences, is just what
OS you're running.

Paul

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in news:tg1egd$3m89k$1@dont-email.me:

> On 9/15/2022 10:31 PM, sumbuddy wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the reply Paul, but I am at a loss as to exactly how this
>> relates to the question of a website profiling your browser across two
>> different operating systems especially if you're using Virtual box as
>> the boot medium?
>
> Sorry, I thought you were worried about Microsoft snooping on you.
>
> The browser has little in the way of OS context. It has the UserAgent
> string. With the Win NT number (5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3).
>
> Some of the subsystems may be observable with about:support, but this
> is not information which is exported to mere websites. If a video
> they want you to see, won't play, they may be able to figure out
> the OS doesn't have DXVA2, and thus, you're on Windows XP. But since
> the UserAgent string gave that away (as 5.1), it's not exactly
> a secret what OS you're on.
>
> Maybe font sniffing would show a difference. But again, they know your
> OS, so guessing your OS using font fingerprint is silly.
>
> That's why it would not have occurred to me, to be expecting
> the browser to behave differently from that perspective.
>
> If you customize the fonts, which changes the results of some
> fingerprinting code, then that's not the fault of the OS.
> That's a user-inspired change.
>
> If your UserAgent did not give away the OS version, then
> we could pretend to be worried about the OS-caused differences.
> But what they can conclude from those differences, is just what
> OS you're running.
>
> Paul
>

Well what about all the other methods of profiling via JS sent by the
site:webugs, canvas fingerprinting,plugin ennumeration,client rectangles,
etc.

I suppose the screen parameters are the same across windows 7 and 8 and 10
if you're using the same machine, unless you've changed them on dual boot
setup.

But the orginal question still remains: what is different if I boot into
win7 versus win8 or win10? What is different if the browser is loaded from
a folder on win7 versus a folder on win8 or win10? The browser can be
changed that is not the issue. What I am asking about are discernable
variables that the site can obtain that remain constant across dual boot
OS?

On 9/24/2022 1:16 AM, anonymous wrote:
> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in news:tg1egd$3m89k$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 9/15/2022 10:31 PM, sumbuddy wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply Paul, but I am at a loss as to exactly how this
>>> relates to the question of a website profiling your browser across two
>>> different operating systems especially if you're using Virtual box as
>>> the boot medium?
>>
>> Sorry, I thought you were worried about Microsoft snooping on you.
>>
>> The browser has little in the way of OS context. It has the UserAgent
>> string. With the Win NT number (5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3).
>>
>> Some of the subsystems may be observable with about:support, but this
>> is not information which is exported to mere websites. If a video
>> they want you to see, won't play, they may be able to figure out
>> the OS doesn't have DXVA2, and thus, you're on Windows XP. But since
>> the UserAgent string gave that away (as 5.1), it's not exactly
>> a secret what OS you're on.
>>
>> Maybe font sniffing would show a difference. But again, they know your
>> OS, so guessing your OS using font fingerprint is silly.
>>
>> That's why it would not have occurred to me, to be expecting
>> the browser to behave differently from that perspective.
>>
>> If you customize the fonts, which changes the results of some
>> fingerprinting code, then that's not the fault of the OS.
>> That's a user-inspired change.
>>
>> If your UserAgent did not give away the OS version, then
>> we could pretend to be worried about the OS-caused differences.
>> But what they can conclude from those differences, is just what
>> OS you're running.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
> Well what about all the other methods of profiling via JS sent by the
> site:webugs, canvas fingerprinting,plugin ennumeration,client rectangles,
> etc.
>
> I suppose the screen parameters are the same across windows 7 and 8 and 10
> if you're using the same machine, unless you've changed them on dual boot
> setup.
>
> But the orginal question still remains: what is different if I boot into
> win7 versus win8 or win10? What is different if the browser is loaded from
> a folder on win7 versus a folder on win8 or win10? The browser can be
> changed that is not the issue. What I am asking about are discernable
> variables that the site can obtain that remain constant across dual boot
> OS?
>

The other aspect of fingerprinting, is "how unique is this individual".
Changing OSes, definitely will change certain aspects of window decorations,
pixels widths and so on. (An application stopped fitting my Win10 screen
for example, a hint of the diffs.) So if we were checking to see if you'd
"come back to my site" with your Win10-launched browser, I could
use your fingerprint to figure out it was you. Presumably this
sort of thing is the main purpose of fingerprinting.

And if you're a person who uses a unique set of anti-fingerprinting
tools, just the pattern of that may be a very unique signature as well.
Intuition may not always be your best friend. I don't know if there
are any good tools for identifying a return visit (without supercookies
or evercookies) or not. The site that discussed evercookies, doesn't
use fingerprinting, and is still able to identify a lot of people on
their second visit.

It's not that the concept is silly, it's that it is damn hard
to say with any certainty, exactly what you achieve by hiding
under rocks. Your ISP could log all your traffic for example,
and sell it to someone. The tracking people have an army -- and
you're all by yourself attempting to match wits with them.

I'm a realist, when it comes to that army.

And that army is filled with cheeky bastards. For example, they
know my location with some degree of precision, but yet they put
baloney about "your activities indicate you are in Washington" :-/
Or a weather bug, will give the weather of the head office of my
ISP. Well, these "missed shots" are hiding the fact they do
know where I am, and they're just taunting me with this shit for fun.
As soon as I check the hours on Joes Pizza (a local pizza place
that stays open late), they can conclude instantly, "he's in Portland".
But the bottom of the web page will still say Washington.

Paul

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in news:tgoq0f$37pav$1@dont-email.me:

> On 9/24/2022 1:16 AM, anonymous wrote:
>> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in
>> news:tg1egd$3m89k$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> On 9/15/2022 10:31 PM, sumbuddy wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the reply Paul, but I am at a loss as to exactly how
>>>> this relates to the question of a website profiling your browser
>>>> across two different operating systems especially if you're using
>>>> Virtual box as the boot medium?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I thought you were worried about Microsoft snooping on you.
>>>
>>> The browser has little in the way of OS context. It has the
>>> UserAgent string. With the Win NT number (5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3).
>>>
>>> Some of the subsystems may be observable with about:support, but
>>> this is not information which is exported to mere websites. If a
>>> video they want you to see, won't play, they may be able to figure
>>> out the OS doesn't have DXVA2, and thus, you're on Windows XP. But
>>> since the UserAgent string gave that away (as 5.1), it's not exactly
>>> a secret what OS you're on.
>>>
>>> Maybe font sniffing would show a difference. But again, they know
>>> your OS, so guessing your OS using font fingerprint is silly.
>>>
>>> That's why it would not have occurred to me, to be expecting
>>> the browser to behave differently from that perspective.
>>>
>>> If you customize the fonts, which changes the results of some
>>> fingerprinting code, then that's not the fault of the OS.
>>> That's a user-inspired change.
>>>
>>> If your UserAgent did not give away the OS version, then
>>> we could pretend to be worried about the OS-caused differences.
>>> But what they can conclude from those differences, is just what
>>> OS you're running.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>
>> Well what about all the other methods of profiling via JS sent by the
>> site:webugs, canvas fingerprinting,plugin ennumeration,client
>> rectangles, etc.
>>
>> I suppose the screen parameters are the same across windows 7 and 8
>> and 10 if you're using the same machine, unless you've changed them
>> on dual boot setup.
>>
>> But the orginal question still remains: what is different if I boot
>> into win7 versus win8 or win10? What is different if the browser is
>> loaded from a folder on win7 versus a folder on win8 or win10? The
>> browser can be changed that is not the issue. What I am asking about
>> are discernable variables that the site can obtain that remain
>> constant across dual boot OS?
>>
>
> The other aspect of fingerprinting, is "how unique is this
> individual". Changing OSes, definitely will change certain aspects of
> window decorations, pixels widths and so on. (An application stopped
> fitting my Win10 screen for example, a hint of the diffs.) So if we
> were checking to see if you'd "come back to my site" with your
> Win10-launched browser, I could use your fingerprint to figure out it
> was you. Presumably this sort of thing is the main purpose of
> fingerprinting.
>
> And if you're a person who uses a unique set of anti-fingerprinting
> tools, just the pattern of that may be a very unique signature as
> well. Intuition may not always be your best friend. I don't know if
> there are any good tools for identifying a return visit (without
> supercookies or evercookies) or not. The site that discussed
> evercookies, doesn't use fingerprinting, and is still able to identify
> a lot of people on their second visit.
>
> It's not that the concept is silly, it's that it is damn hard
> to say with any certainty, exactly what you achieve by hiding
> under rocks. Your ISP could log all your traffic for example,
> and sell it to someone. The tracking people have an army -- and
> you're all by yourself attempting to match wits with them.
>
> I'm a realist, when it comes to that army.
>
> And that army is filled with cheeky bastards. For example, they
> know my location with some degree of precision, but yet they put
> baloney about "your activities indicate you are in Washington" :-/
> Or a weather bug, will give the weather of the head office of my
> ISP. Well, these "missed shots" are hiding the fact they do
> know where I am, and they're just taunting me with this shit for fun.
> As soon as I check the hours on Joes Pizza (a local pizza place
> that stays open late), they can conclude instantly, "he's in
> Portland". But the bottom of the web page will still say Washington.
>
> Paul
>

Facebook does a lot of this shit. They even use fake accounts to try to
get info on you and profile you. That plus they spy on your messenger
sessions. An evil company if there ever was one. The methods of
profiling and endless and changing every day. It's a cat and mouse game.
A lot depends on how much time and trouble a site wants to spend on it.
Remember when the internet was a free and open place and you did not
have to worry much about this crap? I do.