> Unfortunately this approach makes you quite unique for fingerprinting

As opposed to sharing your actual latitude,longitude and microphone readings?

Or can. Numerous anti-Fingerprinting systems have been discovered to make you more fingerprintable.

Why? Only if you would reuse the same data multiple times, or if you use a unique random generator that is easily distinguishable from other data. So maybe don't use the 5x5 island, but when done right the approach shouldn't help fingerprinting?

Exactly. Just pick a random location on the planet and have it randomly wander. Have a consistent but (statistically) different location per-app.

I don't think this assessment is correct. No one said completely random data. It certainly could make fingerprinting possible (or, easier than no spoofing at all) if the right considerations are not taken.

>No one said completely random data.

It doesn't have to be random to be a problem.

In general any sort of intervention that moves you away from Joe average is bad news for fingerprinting.

More sophistication in this context often makes things worse not better. e.g. In this context volunteering info on every request (fake or random doesn't matter) certainly makes you unique, because the average user doesn't do that

I took issue with your use of 'makes'. Your statement incorrect. It could open someone up to fingerprinting if done incorrectly. It could also provide utility to a user.

The draconian rhetoric you are using is the same logic someone uses to advocate for no symmetric encryption because it can be implemented incorrectly.

Reiterating your basic fact about fingerprinting doesn't change this, or negate the rest of my statements you ignore because you think nuance and user requirements can be reduced to a binary.

That might be fine. He's the guy who says he's on Mount Kilimanjaro. Where is he actually? Don't know. IP address looks like France.

not if its an os feature.

maybe we can also provide another option: feed this shared pool of fake data instead.