t13d101000_61a7ad8aa9b6_01def6fbf02e
PerplexityBot — inferred from the User-Agent on its requests.
What this fingerprint encodes
t13d101000
handshake shape, human-readable
61a7ad8aa9b6
truncated hash of the cipher list
01def6fbf02e
truncated hash of extensions + signature algorithms
- Transport
- TCP
- TLS version
- TLS 1.3
- Server name
- server name sent
- Cipher suites offered
- 10
- Extensions offered
- 10
- ALPN
- none offered
The hello it was computed from
Recovered because the proxy now stores the pre-hash JA3 string alongside the digest. Every number below came out of this client's ClientHello; anything we cannot name in the IANA registry is shown as its raw value rather than guessed at.
- Version
- TLS 1.2
Cipher suites 10
-
TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_EMPTY_RENEGOTIATION_INFO_SCSV
Extensions 10
-
extended_master_secret -
status_request -
signature_algorithms -
supported_groups -
server_name -
session_ticket -
supported_versions -
key_share -
ec_point_formats -
psk_key_exchange_modes
Named groups 3
-
x25519 -
secp256r1 -
secp384r1
Point formats 1
-
uncompressed
Raw JA3 string
771,4866-4865-4867-49196-49195-52393-49200-49199-52392-255,23-5-13-10-0-35-43-51-11-45,29-23-24,0
Seen in live traffic
- Connections
- 220
- First seen
- 2026-08-24 10:37 UTC
- Last seen
- 2026-10-07 04:48 UTC
- Transport
- TCP
- JA3 hashes absorbed
- 197
The same client, 197 different JA3s
This one JA4 covers 197 distinct JA3 hashes. A JA3 hashes the cipher and extension lists in the order they arrived, so a client that shuffles them — which Chrome and its derivatives do on purpose — produces a new JA3 almost every connection and fragments into what looks like 197 unrelated clients. JA4 sorts those lists before hashing, which is why all of it lands here instead.
d819bfceb5b843d1b942ccc74894b6732e0e92b90c8e79e19fbcc7652a348bb8ae4de56710d6b80f000e5dca3d8fbef0620337eebe462c72d63da83ae64f0663eeaf414f702fd599b5b5f7f4e2cf21c1bf3ab1aecf00949bf8d929e5cceeef574e1a75cd7222bb2ca9ca2a9b889abf5747478c2bb7b91a62cda457f5c463cb0c6a15043f593bcd30c22970c194cd5cf28da829f28229706d148f7c39177ffc545cdcc9cc1ebed0136464371ac640d90fcaed531980cd3c3d081316fe1032ff07- … and 185 more
User-Agents seen on this fingerprint
Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; PerplexityBot/1.0; +https://perplexity.ai/perplexitybot)20×Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/147.0.0.0 Safari/537.362×
A User-Agent is self-declared and trivially forged, so this names an observation rather than proving an identity. It is still the strongest signal available: the fingerprint comes off the TLS handshake and the User-Agent off the request that followed, and one client build keeping a stable JA4 while changing what it calls itself is a finding in its own right.
This entry is an observation, not a policy decision. It is here because the edge saw it, not because anyone reviewed it, and it blocks nothing on its own. Only the curated tier drives classification and banning.