当我使用一台从未访问过我的网上银行网站的机器时，我被要求进行额外的身份验证。然后，如果我第二次回到网上银行网站，我不会被要求额外的身份验证……我删除了IE中的所有cookie，并重新登录到我的网上银行网站，完全期待再次被问到身份验证问题。令我吃惊的是，没有人问我。这难道不会让人相信银行正在做某种不涉及cookie的PC标记吗?

这是银行使用的一种非常常见的身份验证类型。

假设您正在通过example-isp.com访问您的银行网站。第一次登录时，系统会要求您输入密码，并进行额外的身份验证。一旦您通过了认证，银行就知道用户“thatisvaliant”已通过身份验证，可以通过example-isp.com访问该网站。

将来，当您通过example-isp.com访问该网站时，它将不会要求额外的身份验证(除了您的密码)。如果您试图通过another-isp.com访问该银行，该银行将再次执行相同的程序。

总之，银行识别的是你的ISP和/或网络块，基于你的IP地址。显然，ISP上的每个用户都不是你，这就是为什么银行仍然要求你输入密码的原因。

当你在另一个国家使用信用卡时，你有没有接到信用卡公司的电话来核实事情是否正常?相同的概念。

我的文章可能不是一个解决方案，但我可以提供一个例子，这个功能已经实现。

如果你第一次在电脑上访问www.supertorrents.org的注册页面，没问题。但如果您刷新页面或再次打开页面，它会识别出您之前访问过该页面。真正的美妙之处在于——即使你重新安装Windows或其他操作系统，它也能识别出来。

我在某处读到，他们存储CPU ID。虽然我不知道他们是怎么做到的，但我非常怀疑，他们可能使用MAC地址来做到这一点。

如果我知道怎么做，我一定会分享的。

如果没有用户的合作，识别访问网站的电脑是不可能的。但是，如果他们允许，您可以存储一个cookie，以便在机器再次访问您的网站时识别它。关键在于，访问者是可控的;他们可以删除cookie，并随时以新访客的身份出现。

一个技巧:

Create 2 Registration Pages: First Registration Page: without any email or security check (just with username and password) Second Registration Page: with high security level (email verification request and security image and etc.) For customer satisfaction, and easy registration, default registration page should be the (First Registration Page) but in the (First Registration Page) there is a hidden restriction. It's IP Restriction. If an IP tried to register for second time, (for example less than 1 hour) instead of showing the block page. you can show the (Second Registration Page) automatically. in the (First Registration Page) you can set (for example: block 2 attempts from 1 ip for just 1 hour or 24 hours) and after (for example) 1 hour, you can open access from that ip automatically

请注意:(第一注册页)和(第二注册页)不应在分开的页面。你只写了一页。(例如:register.php)，并在第一PHP样式和第二PHP样式之间切换

我猜结论是我不能通过编程唯一地识别一台正在访问我的网站的计算机。

I have the following question. When i use a machine which has never visited my online banking web site i get asked for additional authentification. then, if i go back a second time to the online banking site i dont get asked the additional authentification. reading the answers to my question i decided it must be a cookie involved. therefore, i deleted all cookies in IE and relogged onto my online banking site fully expecting to be asked the authentification questions again. to my surprise i was not asked. doesnt this lead one to believe the bank is doing some kind of pc tagging which doesnt involve cookies?

此外，今天在谷歌搜索了很多之后，我发现了以下公司，他们声称出售一种解决方案，可以唯一地识别访问网站的机器。http://www.the41.com/products.asp。

我很感激所有好的信息，如果你能进一步澄清这些相互矛盾的信息，我将非常感激。

这些人开发了一种指纹识别方法，可以非常准确地识别用户:

https://panopticlick.eff.org/static/browser-uniqueness.pdf

We investigate the degree to which modern web browsers are subject to “device fingerprinting” via the version and configuration information that they will transmit to websites upon request. We implemented one possible fingerprinting algorithm, and collected these fingerprints from a large sample of browsers that visited our test side, panopticlick.eff.org. We observe that the distribution of our finger- print contains at least 18.1 bits of entropy, meaning that if we pick a browser at random, at best we expect that only one in 286,777 other browsers will share its fingerprint. Among browsers that support Flash or Java, the situation is worse, with the average browser carrying at least 18.8 bits of identifying information. 94.2% of browsers with Flash or Java were unique in our sample.

通过观察回访用户，我们估计浏览器指纹随时间变化的速度。在我们的样本中，指纹变化很大 很快，但即使是一个简单的启发式通常也能猜出指纹是先前观察到的浏览器的“升级”版本 指纹，99.1%的猜测正确率和假阳性率只有 0.86%。

We discuss what privacy threat browser fingerprinting poses in practice, and what countermeasures may be appropriate to prevent it. There is a tradeoff between protection against fingerprintability and certain kinds of debuggability, which in current browsers is weighted heavily against privacy. Paradoxically, anti-fingerprinting privacy technologies can be self- defeating if they are not used by a sufficient number of people; we show that some privacy measures currently fall victim to this paradox, but others do not.