[jstapels]

Not to sound pessimistic, but as more and more people get forced into metered bandwidth, how is using a plugin that generates extra random traffic "sticking it to the 'man'"?

Edit: Yes, I know this is supposed to mask your actual viewing habits. But security through obscurity has never really panned out for anyone in the end.

[dullgiulio]

This is not security through obscurity, this is obfuscation. Like everything in security, it's not all-or-nothing. It adds valuable noise, it won't hide your tracks.

[arekkas]

Adding variance always messes with statistical models and thus anything related to big data analytics, which internet surveillance is all about.

[threepipeproblm]

Is 'it uses bandwidth' really a valid criticism of this? I would say no.

It's also not really "security by obscurity", which I believe refers to situations where techniques uses to secure a system are kept quiet in the hopes no one will figure them out. Here we have a system that is already breached and the point is to defeat analysis. Most analytic techniques I can think of would be defeated by the right kind of "noise", despite the fact that there may awareness that the noise is in there.

[russdpale]

Individually it doesn't do much. The bigger point is the render the data as useless.