JA4 t13d1012ht_61a7ad8aa9b6_3ef862bd26ae

t13d1012ht_61a7ad8aa9b6_3ef862bd26ae

Completed a TLS handshake but never an HTTP request, so no User-Agent was ever presented.

What this fingerprint encodes

Transport

TCP

TLS version

TLS 1.3

Server name

server name sent

Cipher suites offered

10

Extensions offered

12

ALPN

ht

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 12

• application_layer_protocol_negotiation
• signature_algorithms
• supported_groups
• supported_versions
• ec_point_formats
• compress_certificate
• server_name
• key_share
• status_request
• extended_master_secret
• psk_key_exchange_modes
• pre_shared_key

Named groups 3

• x25519
• secp256r1
• secp384r1

Point formats 1

• uncompressed

771,4866-4865-4867-49196-49195-52393-49200-49199-52392-255,16-13-10-43-11-27-0-51-5-23-45-41,29-23-24,0

Seen in live traffic

Connections

49

First seen

2026-09-17 19:58 UTC

Last seen

2026-09-19 00:11 UTC

Transport

TCP

JA3 hashes absorbed

49

The same client, 49 different JA3s

This one JA4 covers 49 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 49 unrelated clients. JA4 sorts those lists before hashing, which is why all of it lands here instead.

• 7c74a9c3aa977d5cd8f30969cd0cc56b
• 433a8a98e1a1df5c29a2317aeae54468
• 3f8e65fa07fc4b0b5cfe0ecb7b274682
• 7fe84e831df65db2d9e092300f82d23f
• 15230b50c95f3d394c7d6bb8ee2e65ea
• e8d5665a15330aff2babb1928c7e680b
• b08d8e8939f2ab9fa60a30e567d1691f
• c6c110b621883799cc18d29b8ec543de
• 72b6a417f12c419f8a0f0a569d8d4dd1
• 9a21d4a3a8bef4e0e674bc278bfcc75e
• 8eb8194b96f46adeda59bb953e0f15da
• b6b37774045cd51e73e9f2d74f9dd71d
• … and 37 more

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.