t13d1517h2_8daaf6152771_98d29f222568
Firefox — inferred from the User-Agent on its requests.
What this fingerprint encodes
t13d1517h2
handshake shape, human-readable
8daaf6152771
truncated hash of the cipher list
98d29f222568
truncated hash of extensions + signature algorithms
- Transport
- TCP
- TLS version
- TLS 1.3
- Server name
- server name sent
- Cipher suites offered
- 15
- Extensions offered
- 17
- ALPN
- h2
Same tool, different options
These 3 other fingerprints share this one's JA4_c — the extension and signature-algorithm hash. A client that keeps its extension set constant while varying its cipher list produces exactly this pattern, which is what a scanner iterating cipher suites looks like. A JA3 cannot show you this: its single MD5 collapses ciphers and extensions together, so every variation looks like an unrelated client.
- t13d1617h2_46e7e9700bed_98d29f222568
- t13d1617h2_86a278354501_98d29f222568
- t13d1717h2_5b57614c22b0_98d29f222568
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 15
-
TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 -
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA -
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA -
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 -
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 -
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA -
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
Extensions 17
-
server_name -
extended_master_secret -
renegotiation_info -
supported_groups -
ec_point_formats -
application_layer_protocol_negotiation -
status_request -
34 (0x0022) -
signed_certificate_timestamp -
key_share -
supported_versions -
signature_algorithms -
psk_key_exchange_modes -
record_size_limit -
compress_certificate -
encrypted_client_hello -
pre_shared_key
Named groups 5
-
SecP256r1MLKEM768 -
x25519 -
secp256r1 -
secp384r1 -
secp521r1
Point formats 1
-
uncompressed
Raw JA3 string
771,4865-4867-4866-49195-49199-52393-52392-49196-49200-49171-49172-156-157-47-53,0-23-65281-10-11-16-5-34-18-51-43-13-45-28-27-65037-41,4588-29-23-24-25,0
Seen in live traffic
- Connections
- 4712
- First seen
- 2026-08-23 23:21 UTC
- Last seen
- 2026-10-10 01:33 UTC
- Transport
- TCP
- JA3 hashes absorbed
- 3
The same client, 3 different JA3s
This one JA4 covers 3 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 3 unrelated clients. JA4 sorts those lists before hashing, which is why all of it lands here instead.
a55f6cb044839f48d371a56323ed22ef020ee54457b3c1d5f5a5050b22bee1f3aa72e467ff1792b0ea62c1a6de2010d4
User-Agents seen on this fingerprint
Mozilla/5.0 (Android 16; Mobile; rv:156.0) Gecko/156.0 Firefox/156.069×Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:154.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/154.041×Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:154.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/154.020×Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:156.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/156.011×Mozilla/5.0 (Android 16; Mobile; rv:157.0) Gecko/157.0 Firefox/157.09×Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:155.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/155.01×
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.