Docker Manager on Windows/WSL2: expected hardware and GPU fingerprint model?

[morpheus9393]

Hi, I have a question about the intended fingerprint model for CloakBrowser Manager when running on Windows via Docker Desktop / WSL2.

From the current source, Manager appears to run each profile inside a Linux container using KasmVNC/Xvnc, and browser_manager.py adds --use-angle=swiftshader with the comment 'software GL for VNC (no GPU in container)'. The README also states that everything runs in one Docker container.

In this setup:

Windows host
-> Docker Desktop / WSL2 backend
-> Linux Docker container
-> KasmVNC/Xvnc display
-> CloakBrowser profile

What should websites be expected to see for hardware-related signals?

Specific questions:

• Are GPU/WebGL/WebGPU signals intended to be fully controlled by CloakBrowser profile settings, or should users expect SwiftShader/VNC/container characteristics to remain visible?
• If a profile is configured with platform=windows, is the intended result a coherent Windows-like fingerprint despite the browser process running in a Linux container?
• Are CPU core count, screen size, timezone, locale, and GPU vendor/renderer fully profile-controlled through the --fingerprint-* args?
• Is --use-angle=swiftshader the recommended/default rendering path for Manager profiles?
• Are there recommended settings for minimizing Linux/container/VNC telltales on Windows Docker Desktop?
• Related operational question: does the intended model use one container for all profiles, with separate Xvnc displays/browser processes/user_data_dirs per profile, or should advanced users consider one container per profile for stronger isolation?

I'm trying to understand whether Manager should be treated as a containerized Linux runtime with spoofed profile identity, or as a way to expose/use host Windows hardware through Docker/WSL2.

Thanks!