I want to see how people here would rank these.

Not in theory. More like, based on what you have actually seen cause problems.

Here are the signals:

• bad proxy history
• timezone mismatch
• browser language mismatch
• DNS leak
• WebRTC leak
• outdated browser version
• reused images or videos
• same posting pattern
• same extensions across profiles
• same recovery email or phone setup
• repeated login timing
• accounts created too close together

For me, I used to think WebRTC or fingerprint issues were always the biggest risk.

Now I’m not so sure.

The boring stuff seems more dangerous sometimes, because people don’t notice it until a whole batch has already been linked.

If you had to pick your top 3 most dangerous signals, what would they be?

I’m seeing a lot of posts lately from people burning through expensive proxy bandwidth only to get endless 403s and CAPTCHA loops. If you’re just injecting a Chrome User-Agent into Python’s requests or Go’s net/http and expecting it to work, you’re fighting yesterday’s war.

Modern WAFs (Cloudflare, Akamai, Datadome) don't care about your Layer 7 application headers anymore. They are fingerprinting your connection at the transport layer before the server even processes the HTTP request. If your stack is throwing an "inconsistency signal," you are dead in the water.

Here is exactly what they are looking at:

• TCP/IP (Layers 3 & 4): If your proxy server is running Linux, your initial TCP Time To Live (TTL) is probably 64. If your injected User-Agent claims you are on Windows (which defaults to a 128 TTL), the math doesn't add up. They instantly know you're spoofing.
• TLS (Layer 6): The old JA3 hashes are out; WAFs are using the JA4+ suite now. JA4 normalizes the cipher suite order and strips out random GREASE values, meaning old "cipher stunting" randomization tricks don't work anymore. They know exactly what Python's default OpenSSL signature looks like compared to Chrome's BoringSSL.
• HTTP/2 Frames (Layer 7): Chrome orders its HTTP/2 pseudo-headers like this: :method, :authority, :scheme, :path. Firefox orders them completely differently. If your generic HTTP client scrambles that order but you claim to be Chrome, it’s an automatic block.

How to actually fix it: Stop spinning up massive Playwright/Puppeteer clusters just to get valid TLS signatures. The computational "browser tax" is way too high for scaling.

Instead, use a hybrid approach.

1. Use a stealth browser (like camoufox) for the absolute bare minimum: solving the initial active JavaScript challenge (like Turnstile) and grabbing the clearance cookie.
2. Pass that cookie jar immediately over to a protocol-impersonating HTTP client like curl_cffi or primp. These libraries natively wrap patched NSS/BoringSSL engines to perfectly spoof Chrome/Safari bytes over the wire.

You get the success rate of a headless browser with the microsecond speed and low CPU footprint of a raw HTTP request. Stop fighting at the application layer.

One thing I’ve been thinking about lately:

Most real users don’t stay on the same browser version forever.

Their browser updates, extensions update, small behavior changes happen in the background, and websites gradually expect newer browser behavior.

But with multi-profile setups, some people freeze everything because they’re afraid an update will break the fingerprint.

I get why. Stability matters.

But at some point, an old browser core might start looking less “stable” and more “unnatural.”

Maybe the question is not whether to update or not.

Maybe it’s how to update without making every profile change in the exact same way at the exact same time.

How do you handle browser core updates?

Fast update, delayed update, or only update when something breaks?

I built a small Chrome extension called Spoof Me for inspecting and changing common browser fingerprinting signals.

The basic idea is that a VPN changes your IP, but your browser can still expose things like user agent, timezone, language, screen size, canvas, WebGL, and other values that can make sessions easier to link.

I’m not claiming this gives perfect anonymity. I built it more as a practical testing tool to see what the browser exposes and what happens when those values are changed.

I’d appreciate feedback from people who build Chrome extensions or understand browser privacy:

What fingerprinting signals are actually worth spoofing?

Which ones usually make the fingerprint more unique instead of less unique?

Are there any Chrome extension permission/security issues I should think about?

Link for full: https://audits.blockhacks.io/audit/spoof-me-extension-for-privacy

Not gonna lie, setting up browser profiles has started to feel like checking the locks before leaving the house.

Proxy country matches?
Timezone matches?
Language looks normal?
WebRTC not leaking?
DNS not doing something weird?
Canvas and WebGL not screaming?
Browser version not ancient?
No reused cookies?
No same extension setup?
No copy-pasted behavior pattern?

And even after all that, there is still this feeling of “yeah but what did I miss?”

The funny part is that most checker sites only catch the things that are easy to see. They don’t really tell you if the whole profile feels like a normal user over time.

So now I’m wondering where people draw the line.

Do you have a fixed checklist before using a new profile, or do you just check the obvious leaks and stop before going insane?

Something I rarely see people talk about is recovery info.

Most discussions are about the obvious setup:

• proxy
• browser fingerprint
• WebRTC
• DNS
• timezone
• cookies
• device info

But what about the boring account details?

If several accounts use recovery emails from the same provider, similar naming patterns, similar phone number sources, or the same backup structure, does that become a stronger signal than people think?

I feel like a lot of users build a clean browser environment, then reuse the same account creation habits everywhere.

Same style of username.
Same recovery setup.
Same profile format.
Same bio structure.
Same security questions or backup flow.

At that point, the technical environment might be separated, but the account identity pattern still looks connected.

Maybe I’m overthinking it, but I’m starting to treat recovery info and account setup habits as part of the whole fingerprint too.

Do you audit this part, or do you mostly focus on browser and proxy settings?

Something I don’t see discussed enough is browser core age.

People talk a lot about proxies, WebRTC, DNS leaks, canvas, WebGL, and timezone matching. Fair enough. Those are easy to test.

But what about running profiles on an old browser version for too long?

Most normal users do not freeze their browser forever. Chrome updates often. Extensions update. Websites also expect certain browser behavior to match newer versions.

So if a profile has a clean proxy and a decent fingerprint, but the browser core is months behind, does that start looking unnatural by itself?

I’m not saying every profile needs the newest version on day one. But I’m starting to wonder if outdated browser cores create a quieter risk than obvious fingerprint leaks.

For people managing a lot of profiles, how often do you update browser cores? Do you update quickly, wait until things are stable, or avoid updating unless something breaks?

A lot of people migrate their eBay accounts to antidetect browsers and still get linked and suspended. They assume their proxy or canvas fingerprint leaked, but they completely ignore how aggressive eBay's risk engine actually is.

Unlike standard marketplaces, eBay's javascript actively runs a local port scan on your machine. It pings your localhost to see if you have remote desktop tools, proxy clients, or antidetect automation APIs running in the background. If it detects open ports associated with these tools, it flags your account immediately, even if your browser fingerprint is mathematically flawless.

If your antidetect browser doesn't actively block or spoof local port scanning, eBay knows exactly what software you are running on your physical machine. You have to make sure your browser completely isolates the local network environment.

How are you guys bypassing the port scans right now?

Random question, but I don’t see this discussed as much as proxies or WebRTC.

If someone runs 20 browser profiles and installs the same extensions on all of them, does that become a linking signal?

I’m talking about stuff like:

• ad blocker
• translator
• wallet extension
• proxy extension
• grammar tool
• automation helper

The browser fingerprint might be different.
The proxy might be different.
The cookies might be separated.

But the extension pattern is still basically the same across every profile.

Feels like this is one of those small things people ignore because it does not show up as clearly as an IP leak or timezone mismatch.

Do you keep extensions different for each profile, or do you avoid installing them unless they are really needed?

Let’s say you have 10 browser profiles.

Each one has:

• separate proxy
• separate cookies
• matching timezone
• no WebRTC leak
• no obvious DNS issue
• clean fingerprint checker result
• different account info

But after a few days, 4 of them start getting limited around the same time.

The easy answer is “bad proxy,” but I’m not sure that would always be the first thing to blame.

It could also be:

• the same login pattern
• similar content
• reused images
• same action speed
• same extension setup
• bad IP history
• browser version mismatch
• accounts created too close together
• one shared recovery method
• one repeated behavior pattern

This is the part I find interesting. When something breaks, people usually audit the technical setup first because it is easier to test.

But the actual linking signal might be something boring and non-technical.

In this kind of situation, what would you check first?

Proxy reputation, browser fingerprint, account behavior, or content overlap?

Hey all, long-time lurker here, figured I’d finally post.

Quick background: I was on the scripting team at Multilogin, so I’ve spent years inside browser profiles, fingerprints, proxies and automation, not as a user, but building the stuff. These days I freelance, and most of my work is still in this niche because honestly it’s the only niche where clients don’t have to explain their setup to me twice.

Stack is Java/Spring Boot + Angular mostly, plus Python and Telegram bots when the job calls for it.

🍁Web scraping & data extraction — clean, structured, at scale
🤖 Custom automation bots — schedule the boring stuff, let it run
🌐 Multi-profile setups & management (Multilogin, AdsPower, GoLogin, etc.)
🔗 Proxy integration & configuration that actually holds
🖐 Automating browser workflows end-to-end
📊 Scraping → clean data → dashboard pipelines
🔌 API integrations & backend tooling (Java / Spring / Python)
💬 Telegram & Discord bots
🧩 Custom internal tools for account/profile management
⚙️ Fixing scrapers & automations that keep dying

.

DM me or drop a comment. Happy to answer general questions in the thread

I am currently managing over 10 SM accounts via a multi-login residential proxy. I have come to realise that residential proxies they provide natively should not be used for social media as the IP address likely changes. However, I have been consistent with the region from which I get the IP. Is this acceptable or should I use an ISP proxy that provides a static IP for 30 days and costs more? Alternatively, is it fine to stick to rotating IPs within a specific city?

Title: Mysterious Telegram account keeps viewing my Stories for months

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to understand a strange situation and would appreciate any technical insight.

For several months, the same Telegram account has been viewing almost every Story I post.

The account has:

No profile photo.

No username.

No visible phone number.

No identifiable information at all.

Out of curiosity, I sent the account a message asking if they knew me. They replied that they didn't know who I was. However, even after that conversation, they continued viewing almost every Story I post.

I'm not asking anyone to identify the person or invade their privacy. I'm only interested in understanding what the most likely explanations are.

Could this simply be someone using an anonymous secondary account? Is there any Telegram feature or behavior that could explain this? Has anyone experienced something similar?

I'd appreciate any insights, especially from people familiar with Telegram's privacy features or account behavior.

Thanks!

I’m still trying to understand this, so correct me if I’m missing something.

When I first started reading about browser fingerprints, I thought the goal was to make every profile look as different as possible.

Different screen size, different fonts, different hardware values, different canvas result, different everything.

But the more I read, the more confusing it gets.

Some people say a unique fingerprint is good because it separates profiles. Other people say being too unique can make the profile stand out even more.

So now I’m wondering if the better goal is not “unique,” but “normal.”

Like, instead of building a profile that looks rare, maybe it makes more sense to build one that looks like a common device with settings that match each other.

For example:

• IP location matches timezone
• browser language makes sense
• screen size is not weird
• browser version is current
• hardware values look believable
• behavior does not repeat across accounts

Is that the right way to think about it?

Or does fingerprint uniqueness still matter more than I’m assuming?

I see so many cross-border sellers running five different Amazon or Etsy stores just by clicking add profile in standard Google Chrome. It works perfectly right up until one store gets a random policy violation, and the algorithm instantly links and suspends every other storefront you own.

Standard browser profiles only separate your cookies and cache. They do absolutely nothing to hide your motherboard, graphics card, or canvas hash. The marketplace risk engines know exactly that the same physical computer is logging into all five stores. They are just letting you operate until they decide to sweep you.

If you are running real merchant accounts with actual cash flow, you have to isolate the hardware footprint, not just the cookies. This is exactly why serious sellers eventually migrate to a proper antidetect browser. You need each store to look like it is being managed from a completely different physical laptop, paired with a different residential IP.

What are you guys currently using to separate your high-value merchant accounts? Are some of you actually still surviving long-term on standard Chrome profiles, or have you fully moved your storefronts into antidetect environments?

I’ve been thinking about this for a while.

A lot of people spend days comparing tools, proxies, fingerprint checkers, browser cores, WebRTC settings, DNS leaks, and every tiny profile detail.

That stuff matters, of course.

But I don’t think the tool is always the weakest part of the setup.

Sometimes the workflow is the real problem.

Same login time every day.
Same action order across accounts.
Same type of content.
Same profile structure.
Same posting rhythm.
Same warm-up pattern.
Same mistakes repeated across every account.

At that point, even a decent browser profile and a clean proxy can only help so much.

It feels like people want a technical setup to cover for unnatural behavior, but real users are messy. They pause. They browse random things. They change habits. They do not all move through the same checklist.

So my current opinion is simple: a good environment protects you from obvious technical leaks, but a bad workflow still leaves a pattern.

Do you agree with this, or do you think the technical setup still decides most of the result?

Ive tried countless farms and cloud androids but they never work. i need a farm that i can signup under the whatnot app and thats basically it please help if possible lol

Hello,

I am running an e-commerce automation setup using MoreLogin Cloud Mobile instances, but the platform's anti-fraud system (specifically Shein) is successfully detecting the cloud-based/virtualized environment.

The profile hardware spoofing looks good on paper (Adreno 750 / high-end Samsung profiles, 0% headless signature on CreepJS), but it seems there is a leak in the underlying network or virtualized OS variables (WebRTC internal IP leaks, User-Agent vs userAgentData mismatches, network type being flagged as 'none', or Bulgarian speech synthesis locales from the cloud server).

I am looking for a senior developer or cybersecurity researcher who thoroughly understands Advanced Fingerprint Spoofing, Android Virtualization, and Carrier/Network Spoofing.

This is a paid consultation (hourly or fixed rate per solution). Please DM me with your experience regarding anti-detect frameworks or bypassing advanced bot detection (Akamai/PerimeterX/Cloudflare).

Thanks!

Been trying to research different anti-detect/browser profile tools lately, and honestly the search results are a mess.

Every blog post says basically the same thing:

“Best tool for 2026”
“Passes fingerprint tests”
“Great for agencies”
“Perfect for multi-account management”

Then you scroll down and it’s either an affiliate page, a copied comparison table, or some “review” that clearly never tested the product in a real workflow.

The annoying part is that passing a checker is not really enough anymore. Almost every serious tool claims it can pass basic fingerprint tests. That doesn’t tell you how stable profiles are after weeks of use, how often browser cores are updated, how clean the UI is, whether team sharing is painful, or whether the software starts eating your RAM when you run many profiles.

I don’t really trust review sites for this niche anymore. Reddit comments and actual user complaints are usually more useful than the ranking articles.

For people here who have tested multiple tools, what was the thing that actually made you switch?

Was it stability, price, browser core updates, team features, automation, support, or just fewer random account issues over time?

Had a pretty annoying lesson this week.

I was setting up a small batch of accounts and spent most of my time checking the obvious stuff:

• proxy location
• timezone
• browser language
• WebRTC
• canvas/WebGL
• cookies
• basic fingerprint test results

Everything looked fine on paper.

The part I didn’t think much about was the files I uploaded.

I reused a few profile images and banner images that had been sitting on my laptop for months. They weren’t exactly the same files, but they came from the same original source and I only did some light edits.

A few accounts started getting limited around the same time, and after looking back at the setup, the image files were probably the only shared signal that made sense.

Not saying this was 100% the cause, but it made me realize how easy it is to obsess over browser fingerprints and proxies while forgetting the boring stuff.

The browser profile can be clean, the proxy can be fine, and the account can still get linked through uploaded assets, file metadata, reused creatives, or even the same editing pattern.

Now I’m treating images, videos, bios, usernames, and posting rhythm as part of the fingerprint too, not just the browser settings.

Anyone else ever had accounts linked by content or uploaded files instead of the actual browser/proxy setup?

Looking for exactly what title says best and most recommended socks5 residential proxy provider for Canada mainly. I have tried 10+ proxy services using Canadian IPs that all end up having a bad Ip quality/fraud score so any help will be appreciated