Enhancing set-constant and set-constant-trusted to random values

[Starmania]

While working on fingerprint mitigation, I wanted to introduce randomness by assigning a different value on each page load. I initially considered using set-constant, but as the name suggests, it only allows fixed values.

I’d like to propose extending set-constant to support dynamic randomization (either generated once before page load and kept constant, or re-generated on each get, this would need to be discussed). For example:

• Random integer values between 0 and 32767 (Actual limit of set-constant)
• Random boolean values (true/false)

Similarly, it would be great if set-constant-trusted could be extended to support more flexible random value types, such as:

• Selecting a random element from a predefined list
• Generating random or “garbage” strings
• Producing negative numbers and floating-point numbers

This would make it easier to simulate more variable fingerprints for improved privacy.

[freezer2022]

Starmania: While working on fingerprint mitigation
Starmania: This would make it easier to simulate more variable fingerprints for improved privacy.

Invalid request and a duplicate of, see:

• https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Does-uBO-protect-against-fingerprinting%3F

[Yuki2718]

It’s not invalid. uBO is not a tool to protect from fingerprinting, but this fact does not conflicts with the suggestion here. Someone might find another use case other than anti-fingerprinting.

[freezer2022]

You didn't understand the context - see the quoted part. What my response was supposed to mean was that it is invalid in context of fingerprinting, as OP's request/suggestion was in context of fingerprinting, therefore my response was supposed to be read in the same context, which means that OP's request is invalid in such a context (fingerprinting). My response was not about other usage scenarios for random set-constant, if OP or anybody else will find out another reasonable usage scenario for random set-constant, other than fingerprinting, then it's fine, and I have nothing against.

[Yuki2718]

@gorhill I had totally forgot that I proposed the same in https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-discussions/discussions/945, though in a different context. Now this feature will be useful again, as the cat-and-mouse game with the site has taken another lap and got back to this situation again.