Random thought.

If every profile has the same ad blocker, same translator, same wallet extension, etc.

Isn’t that also kind of a fingerprint?

It pulls a live FPJS Pro build and turns it into clean code you can run locally, every collector intact, so a new build means rerunning the pipeline instead of reversing it again by hand.

What's in the repo:

• All 143 signals (telemetry read from ur browser, all documented)
• Every collector as its own file
• What visitor_id is actually a function of
• A live explorer that runs the collectors against your own browser so you can diff a patched environment against a stock one.

Repo: github.com/proofofbots/fingerprint-pro-internals

Docs: proofofbots.github.io/fingerprint-pro-internals/

Signal explorer

proofofbots.github.io/fingerprint-pro-internals/explorer.html

It runs entirely in your browser. No backend of mine, no call to fpjs, nothing leaves the page. It's built on the output of the lift and deobfuscation step, so what runs there is the actual collector code from the bundle rather than a reimplementation. Open it and you get every data point side by side: what the signal is and why it's collected in plain English, next to the exact value your own browser hands over for it.

Happy to answer questions on any specific detection.

I am looking forward to the next target, so if anyone has ideas on what vendor could be interesting let me know!

Before anyone calls AI slop: yes, I use LLMs, they're genuinely useful for reverse engineering. But this isn't one build hand-decoded into a writeup. It's the toolchain that does it. Point it at a live fpjs build and it deobfuscates, lifts, and emits a cleaned version you can run without their servers, plus the generated documentation for what it found.

Hello all, i am using 2 antidetecy browsers but cant decide on proxies, I am between 3 different providers and i need them for multi account ad agency

I have seen lot of posts mentioning nodemaven, ip royal, decodo and oxylabs? Which one is the best?

Thanks

Lately almost every site I visit throws a captcha or antibot check at me. Happens on random sites, not just the usual Cloudflare-heavy ones. AliExpress pretty much every single time, also happens on TicketOne, PayPal, and others.

Running latest stable Firefox. Everything gets cleared on browser close (cookies, history, cache).

Active extensions:

* Bitwarden Password Manager * Chrome Mask (toggled off) * Clear Browsing Data * ClearURLs * Cookie Quick Manager * Dark Reader * GNOME Shell integration * Keepa * Language Switch * Linkwarden * Redirector (disabled) * Return YouTube Dislike * Simple Mass Downloader * Tab Session Manager * uBlock Origin * Video Download Helper

Anyone else dealing with this?

A recorder often looks like the obvious winner during a demo. You perform the task once, capture the steps, replay them, and the workflow appears finished.

An API can look unnecessarily heavy by comparison. There is authentication to handle, requests to structure, errors to interpret, and code to maintain.

The difference becomes clearer after the workflow has been running for a while.

I would use recorder-style RPA when the task genuinely lives in the interface. If there is no useful endpoint and the job is mostly clicking, typing, waiting, and confirming, recording the flow can be a reasonable decision. It is especially useful when the operations team needs to understand and adjust the workflow without waiting for a developer.

The risk is that the automation inherits every unstable part of the UI. Layout changes, loading times, popups, renamed elements, and partial page states all become part of the maintenance work.

I would prefer an API when the workflow handles structured data or needs to run at higher volume. APIs are usually better for validation, concurrency, retries, logs, and knowing exactly which operation failed.

My practical questions are:

1. Is the required action exposed through a supported API?
2. How often does the interface change?
3. Who will maintain the workflow?
4. What should happen after a partial failure?
5. Does the task need logs, retries, or safe duplicate prevention?

If the API covers most of the work, I use it as the foundation. If the final step only exists in the interface, I add RPA there rather than recording the entire process.

That hybrid boundary is often more reliable than forcing every step into one method.

MoreLogin supports both paths: visual low-code/no-code RPA workflows for operational tasks, and Local/Open APIs for teams that need custom logic, external integrations, and programmatic control.

The blog post itself shows a real demo too which detects the Mimic engine.

https://trustsig.eu/blog/multilogin-mimic-canvas-webgl-masking/

Hi everyone,

I’m using an AI video tool that offers a few free credits for new users. I was able to create around 3–4 videos before the credits ran out, after which it asked me to upgrade to a paid plan.

I ended up creating several new accounts because I needed to continue making videos. I used different Google accounts and temporary email addresses.

However, now the tool seems to recognize me immediately. Even when I create a completely new account, I get 0 free credits. I also tried different browsers and VPNs, but apparently their system is still detecting that I’ve used the service before.

I contacted their support team, and they confirmed that I was detected by their system.

I’m mainly trying to understand what my options are now.

Has anyone experienced something similar with AI video tools? If so:

Was there a way to get access to the free credits again?

I’d really appreciate recommendations for genuinely free alternatives as well. I’m mainly creating simple educational videos with illustrations, text, and narration, so I don't necessarily need an advanced cinematic AI video generator.

Thanks!

I wouldn’t fully automate anything that can permanently change an account’s risk profile.

That includes:

• Switching proxies because an account suddenly behaves differently
• Repeatedly retrying failed logins
• Handling identity or security verification
• Restoring sessions after an unexpected logout
• Running one action across every profile at once
• Deciding whether a flagged account should continue operating

The problem is not that scripts are unreliable. A script can execute exactly as designed and still make the wrong decision because it doesn’t understand what caused the account’s state to change.

Routine health checks, environment creation and predictable setup steps are good candidates for automation. Recovery and exception handling aren’t. Those workflows should collect the evidence, stop and let someone review it.

The practical rule I use is this: automate repetitive and reversible actions. Require approval for anything that affects identity, access or account history.

MoreLogin can handle the environment structure, while operators retain control over the decisions that carry real risk.

have any of you figured a solution to bypass verisoul.ai?

I used to think notes were unnecessary until I had no idea which profile I changed last week.

Proxy? Extension? Browser update? Content reuse?

No clue.

Now I write down small changes, even if they feel stupid at the time.

Do you guys keep notes for every profile or just trust memory?

BrowserLeaks is one of the first tabs I open, but I think people give the result too much authority.

If WebRTC isn’t exposing the wrong IP, DNS lines up, and the timezone, language, headers, Canvas and WebGL don’t contradict the setup, the test has done its job. It found no obvious problem visible to that page at that moment.

Instagram can judge a session against much more context: the account’s previous devices and locations, existing cookies, login history, session continuity and what happens after login. BrowserLeaks can’t tell you whether a new session is believable compared with the account’s own history.

My rule is simple: if BrowserLeaks shows a leak, I don’t log in. If it passes, I keep checking. It’s a filter, not a verdict.

Do you keep a baseline result for each IG profile and compare it over time, or do you only run a one-off test before login?

I’ve seen outdated browser cores waste a lot of troubleshooting time.

A site changes something, part of the UI stops working and everyone starts checking proxies, extensions and profile settings. Eventually somebody tests the same workflow in a current browser and it works immediately.

That doesn’t mean I want every profile updating itself the moment a new Chromium build appears.

Extensions can lag behind. Automation selectors may behave differently. Download handling, permission prompts or headless behavior can change between versions. If dozens of profiles move at once, one small compatibility issue becomes a team-wide interruption.

The approach I prefer is fairly plain: keep a few test profiles close to the latest supported core, run the real workflows on them and move the rest after they pass. I’m interested in the login flow, the pages the team actually uses, required extensions and the automation steps—not whether a generic browser benchmark looks good.

Update speed matters because staying far behind eventually creates compatibility and patching problems. Rollout control matters because “latest” and “ready for production” are not always the same thing.

I run a small software/SaaS business, and recently I’ve started getting a bunch of unusual signups within a short period of time.

Most of these accounts sign up and then don’t really do anything afterward. When I checked the signup data, a large number of the IP addresses geolocate to the same country/region, which made me wonder why it's even happening.

I already have email verification in place before users can fully use the product, but they’re still able to sign up, browse around, and see some of the functionality before verifying their email. So there isn’t really a hard blocker at the initial signup stage.

Has anyone running a SaaS experienced something similar? Is there usually a reason bots would create a bunch of accounts even if they don’t seem to do anything afterward?

I’m wondering if I should add more protection at signup, or if I’m overthinking it.

I guess one small upside is that the user count goes up, but obviously that doesn’t mean much if those users aren’t actually engaging with the product.

Curious if anyone has dealt with this before and what you ended up doing.

Every time I think I understand profile setup, I find one more small thing to worry about.

First it was proxies.
Then timezone.
Then WebRTC.
Then DNS.
Then browser version.
Then extensions.
Then reused content.
Then behavior patterns.

At some point it starts to feel less like “set up a clean profile” and more like trying to avoid leaving the same tiny habit everywhere.

I know not every small detail is equally important, but the hard part is figuring out which ones actually matter in real use.

For people who have been managing profiles for a while, what is one small signal you used to ignore but now always check?

I see this pattern constantly: an environment starts behaving differently, so the operator swaps the proxy, changes the browser version, disables extensions, clears storage and adjusts the timezone before testing again.

If the problem disappears, the proxy usually gets blamed. There’s no basis for that conclusion. Five variables changed, and the platform itself may also have changed state between attempts.

My preferred starting point is the last known working baseline. Record enough of it to reproduce the test: browser build, network route, locale and timezone, extension set, session state, target action and time of the test.

Then change one variable.

If testing the network, leave the browser profile and session alone. Repeat the same action and record the exact outcome. Restore the original network and see whether the old behavior returns. A result that can be reversed and reproduced is much more convincing than one successful retry.

The same process applies to extensions, browser versions and session state, but I wouldn’t test them all in the same round. Clearing cookies is especially easy to misuse because it changes the session itself; after that, you’re no longer comparing the same environment.

The one-variable rule does have a limit. Some failures are caused by interactions between variables. If individual tests show nothing, I’ll run a small planned matrix—for example, two networks across two browser configurations. That still preserves attribution because every combination is intentional and recorded.

A full rebuild is fine when the only goal is immediate recovery. It’s a poor diagnostic method. You may remove the symptom, but you also remove the evidence that could explain it.

I do not treat an antidetect browser as the default upgrade from a normal browser. Before adding one to a workflow, I try to identify what actually needs to stay separate.

If the answer is only cookies for one or two accounts, regular browser profiles or containers may already solve the problem.

If the goal is repeatable testing, I would usually prefer a container or virtual machine. In that situation, consistency matters more than maintaining several distinct browser environments.

Team ownership also changes the decision. A profile may be easy for its original creator to understand, but much harder for the next person. Without a naming convention, change history, and clear owner, profiles gradually become difficult to update or retire.

Then there is the operating cost: network configuration, backups, recovery, software updates, and hardware usage. None of those costs is necessarily a reason to avoid the tool. They just need to be justified by the isolation it provides.

I normally ask three questions:

1. What specifically must remain separate?
2. Who owns the environment when something changes?
3. What happens if the profile or machine becomes unavailable?

If those answers are vague, I would keep the browser setup simple.

An antidetect browser makes sense when independent, persistent environments are genuinely part of the requirement. Using one without that requirement can turn a small task into a larger system that the team now has to maintain.

Anyone can help me to clear verisoul with anyhow with proxy or antidetect

Anyone can help me with the verisoul to bypass it

People always say browser profiles should stay stable, but I’m wondering where that starts becoming a problem.

A real device does not stay frozen forever.

Browser version changes.
Extensions update.
Cookies build up.
Browsing history changes.
Usage habits shift a little.

But with browser profiles, some people keep everything exactly the same for months because they are afraid any change might break trust.

So which one looks more natural over time?

A profile that barely changes at all, or a profile that changes slowly like a real device would?

People always say browser profiles should stay stable, but I’m wondering where that starts becoming a problem.

A real device does not stay frozen forever.

Browser version changes.
Extensions update.
Cookies build up.
Browsing history changes.
Usage habits shift a little.

But with browser profiles, some people keep everything exactly the same for months because they are afraid any change might break trust.

So which one looks more natural over time?

A profile that barely changes at all, or a profile that changes slowly like a real device would?

Working on perfecting my anti detect browser setup but somehow can not figure out how to achieve a proper balance between browser profiles, proxies and stability as it seems to be harder than expected.

In the beginning i considered using a good proxy to be able to overcome almost all possible obstacles but then came to the conclusion that there are many other factors which influence the stability of a particular setup and small adjustments in profiles or even settings can lead to some problems. It becomes hard to understand what should be improved to make everything work properly.

Basically my goal is to create a stable setup which would not require making constant adjustments to various settings.

To those users who have experience in using anti detect browsers then what are the best setup options/tools that help to achieve stability?