N.E.P.T.R

Papyrus be like: ^

It still gives metrics. And yes, Creepjs is not very useful against randomized values, though I noted it still because Brave fails (resulting in a persistent fingerprint) whereas Cromite succeeded to fool Creepjs. Both have many methods of fingerprinting protection.

Most include micro iirc

Like a weird of the avatar from ATLA

Vivaldi is proprietary. I would def avoid that. Use Cromite instead.

They is the right result, non-unique fingerprint is what you want with Tor Browser.

TL;DR The only way to avoid a near unique fingerprint is Tor Browser Longer explanation: There are too many styles of fingerprinting protections: randomized and normalized. Librewolf inherits its fingerprint protections from Firefox (which intern was upstreamed from the Tor uplift project. It works by taking as many fingerprintable characteristics (refresh rate, canvas, resolution, theme, timezone, etc) and normalizes them to a static value to be shared by all browsers using the feature (privacy.resistFingerprinting in about:config). The benefit of normalizing is you appear more generic, though there are many limitations (biggest of which is OS because you cant hide that). The purpose design of these protections stems from the anonymization strategy of Tor which is to blend in with all other users so no individual can be differentiated based on identifiers. Since Librewolf has different a default settings profile to Tor (or Mullvad) and even vanilla Firefox with RFP enabled, the best you can hope is to blend in with other Librewolf users (which you really cant, especially if you install extensions or change [some] specific settings). Instead, the goal is just to fool naive fingerprinting scripts, nation states or any skilled adversary is out of the scope. Brave (or Cromite) uses the strategy of randomizing fingerprintable characteristics. This is only meant to fool naive FP scripts but in my opinion (when done right) is better at fooling naive scripts. The biggest problem is that these attempts by other browsers and not as comprehensive as Firefox. I think Cromite does a better job than Brave: it is the only browser which fools Creepjs that I have tried by creating a new FP on refresh. Cromite required some configuring to get to place I wanted it, but so does every browser. The advantage with Firefox forks is that vanilla Firefox has RFP and therefore so do the forks (though most dont enable), but you dont blend i with a crowd (making it far less effective than MB or Tor). The advantage of Brave or Cromite is a randomized FP, bit since it isnt upstreamed (and Google will never do that) you stand out like a sore thumb. Either way is fine though for basically everyone. The only browsers I know that work against Creepjs are as follows: Mullvad (persistent FP) Tor (persistent FP) Cromite (randomized FP)