r/AntiDetectGuides

idk who needs to hear this but check your settings before you go opening support tickets and crying about a "bad batch of IPs" lmao.
so basically last 3 days my newly warmed up profiles on dolphin anty were getting flagged instantly. like, right after creation. i was 100% convinced the proxies were dead. opened a ticket, almost bitched out the support team thinking they sold me dirty lines.turns out the proxies were completely fine. I was testing some dedicated ISP lines (which are usually solid af and have UDP enabled). but i completely forgot that i manually toggled off WebRTC spoofing in my main template last week when testing some local script. my actual home IP was leaking straight thru webRTC connection requests, totally bypassing the proxy tunnel for that check. anti-fraud saw the mismatch and hit me with a ban hammer immediately.
turned webRTC masking back on, checked ipchecker, and everything works flawlessly now on the exact same IPs smh.
tl;dr: if your profiles are dying instantly, don’t immediately assume the proxy is dead or blacklisted. check for webRTC/DNS leaks first. 90% of the time it’s user error.

I want to make multiple fb accounts that wont get banned. What antidetect browsers would work for this or would they all work? My idea is to access them from a vps and have every profile tied to a static residential account. Would this work? Im not planning on doing anything illegal or spamming btw.

If anyone has direct experience doing this let me know as id be interested to know whats been working for you.

Anyone else do this?

I looked at my old browser profiles and realized I had no idea what half of them were for.

No notes, random proxies, old cookies, weird names.

At that point, keeping them felt riskier than starting clean.

I tried to clear the verisoul check in survey using antidetect browser but i am not able to clear it. Need help

Hello all, i am using 2 antidetecy browsers but cant decide on proxies, I am between 3 different providers and i need them for multi account ad agency

I have seen lot of posts mentioning nodemaven, ip royal, decodo and oxylabs? Which one is the best?

Thanks

I keep seeing people recommend completely different setups for managing multiple TikTok accounts, so I wanted to break down the 3 approaches I’ve seen most often.
And I’m curious what people actually running multiple accounts are using.

1. Multiple physical phones
Probably the most obvious setup.
One phone (or a few accounts) per device. You get a real Android/iPhone environment, native TikTok app, normal device behavior, camera access, push notifications, etc.

Pros:
● Real device environment
● Native TikTok app
● Pretty straightforward
● Good if you’re managing only a few accounts

Cons:
● Gets expensive fast
● 10–20 accounts can turn your desk into a phone farm 😂
● Charging, SIMs, Wi-Fi and updates become annoying
● Harder to manage remotely or with a team
● Scaling beyond a certain point is just painful
For 2–5 accounts, I’d probably still consider this the simplest option.

2. Antidetect browsers
This is where I think people sometimes mix two different problems together.

Antidetect browsers are mainly built around creating isolated browser profiles with separate cookies, storage, fingerprints and proxies.

That can be useful for platforms where most of the work happens in a browser.

But TikTok is heavily mobile/app-oriented.
You can manage parts of TikTok through the web, but you’re still not operating an actual Android TikTok app. So for workflows that depend on the mobile app, I don’t really see an antidetect browser as a direct replacement for phones.

Pros:
● Easy to create many browser environments
● Centralized profile management
● Convenient for browser-based workflows

Cons for TikTok specifically:
● Browser environment ≠ Android device
● No native TikTok Android app
● Different workflow from an actual phone
● Doesn’t solve every mobile-specific use case
I think this distinction gets ignored way too often.

3. Android Cloud phones
This is the interesting middle ground.
Instead of buying another physical phone, you’re running an Android phone environment in the cloud and controlling it remotely.

So rather than having:
📱📱📱📱📱📱📱📱📱📱
sitting on your desk, you can have multiple Android environments accessible from one computer.
You can install the TikTok app and use the environment much more like a phone than a browser profile.

Pros:
● Actual Android environment rather than just a browser profile
● Native mobile apps
● Much easier to scale than physical phones
● No physical device farm
● Remote access
● Easier to organize multiple environments

Cons:
● Internet connection matters
● Quality varies a LOT between providers
● Cost can still add up at scale
● I wouldn’t assume cloud phone = automatically safe from TikTok restrictions

That last point is important.
Whether you use physical phones, cloud phones or browsers, TikTok can still restrict accounts based on many signals and behaviors. The tool itself isn’t some magic “never get banned” solution.

So which one makes the most sense?
My current view:
2–5 TikTok accounts → physical phones
Simple and probably not worth overengineering.

Larger mobile-first operation → cloud phones
Makes more sense once managing physical devices becomes the bottleneck.

Mostly browser-based workflows → antidetect/browser profiles
Useful when what you’re doing can actually be handled through the web, but I wouldn’t treat them as equivalent to phones for TikTok.

At how many TikTok accounts did physical phones become too annoying for you?

And for anyone who switched to cloud phones: did they actually make management easier, or did you just trade physical-device problems for a different set of problems?

Lately almost every site I visit throws a captcha or antibot check at me. Happens on random sites, not just the usual Cloudflare-heavy ones. AliExpress pretty much every single time, also happens on TicketOne, PayPal, and others.

Running latest stable Firefox. Everything gets cleared on browser close (cookies, history, cache).

Active extensions:

* Bitwarden Password Manager * Chrome Mask (toggled off) * Clear Browsing Data * ClearURLs * Cookie Quick Manager * Dark Reader * GNOME Shell integration * Keepa * Language Switch * Linkwarden * Redirector (disabled) * Return YouTube Dislike * Simple Mass Downloader * Tab Session Manager * uBlock Origin * Video Download Helper

Anyone else dealing with this?

I run a small software/SaaS business, and recently I’ve started getting a bunch of unusual signups within a short period of time.

Most of these accounts sign up and then don’t really do anything afterward. When I checked the signup data, a large number of the IP addresses geolocate to the same country/region, which made me wonder why it's even happening.

I already have email verification in place before users can fully use the product, but they’re still able to sign up, browse around, and see some of the functionality before verifying their email. So there isn’t really a hard blocker at the initial signup stage.

Has anyone running a SaaS experienced something similar? Is there usually a reason bots would create a bunch of accounts even if they don’t seem to do anything afterward?

I’m wondering if I should add more protection at signup, or if I’m overthinking it.

I guess one small upside is that the user count goes up, but obviously that doesn’t mean much if those users aren’t actually engaging with the product.

Curious if anyone has dealt with this before and what you ended up doing.

I’ve seen outdated browser cores waste a lot of troubleshooting time.

A site changes something, part of the UI stops working and everyone starts checking proxies, extensions and profile settings. Eventually somebody tests the same workflow in a current browser and it works immediately.

That doesn’t mean I want every profile updating itself the moment a new Chromium build appears.

Extensions can lag behind. Automation selectors may behave differently. Download handling, permission prompts or headless behavior can change between versions. If dozens of profiles move at once, one small compatibility issue becomes a team-wide interruption.

The approach I prefer is fairly plain: keep a few test profiles close to the latest supported core, run the real workflows on them and move the rest after they pass. I’m interested in the login flow, the pages the team actually uses, required extensions and the automation steps—not whether a generic browser benchmark looks good.

Update speed matters because staying far behind eventually creates compatibility and patching problems. Rollout control matters because “latest” and “ready for production” are not always the same thing.

Every time I think I understand profile setup, I find one more small thing to worry about.

First it was proxies.
Then timezone.
Then WebRTC.
Then DNS.
Then browser version.
Then extensions.
Then reused content.
Then behavior patterns.

At some point it starts to feel less like “set up a clean profile” and more like trying to avoid leaving the same tiny habit everywhere.

I know not every small detail is equally important, but the hard part is figuring out which ones actually matter in real use.

For people who have been managing profiles for a while, what is one small signal you used to ignore but now always check?

If I only need cookie separation for one or two accounts, I’m using normal browser profiles or containers. Turning that into a full antidetect setup gives me profile management, proxy tracking and backups without much benefit.

I’d also think twice if the work changes hands frequently. Unless the team has a decent naming and ownership system, profiles quickly become mystery boxes. Nobody knows why a setting was chosen, so nobody wants to update anything.

For repeatable testing, I’d usually choose containers or virtual machines instead. The goal there is to reproduce the same environment every time, not maintain a collection of different browser identities.

Hardware matters as well. Running several isolated browser environments on a machine that is already short on memory gets old very quickly.

I’m not saying the tool is unnecessary. I’m saying it has an operating cost. If independent browser environments aren’t important enough to justify that cost, I’d use something simpler.