Is this correct? If so, this is not acceptable.
Edit: Replies to this thread indicate this is not fully correct as it exists on all browsers; and is likely an ad thing.
You are viewing a single comment
Edit: Replies to this thread indicate this is not fully correct as it exists on all browsers; and is likely an ad thing.
Laughts in agent spoofing
Browser detection is rarely done through User Agent lookup anymore. Nowadays we determine browser through feature detection.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Browser_detection_using_the_user_agent#avoiding_user_agent_detection
And yet in this case if I change my agent to any non-FF value while using FF, videos load immediately.
I set my agent back to FF, 5 second delay.
Yeah, but some amount of the time is just easier to rely on the user agent. Why bother with the fancy logic when user agent spoofing, adblocking Firefox users is a % of a % of a %?
I tend to agree. I think there's little need as a developer to go that extra mile for accurate browser detection without UA unless it's for fingerprinting. Most feature sets are supported and where it isn't you have a polyfil or whatever shim to make it work. So in the case of fingerprinting you try not to rely fully on anything the user can alter easily.
Doesn't matter what's the best way to do it in reality. UA is easily a possibility for any website. Nothing stopping it
How so?
I won't spoof the agent. I want Google to know I'll keep using Firefox no matter what. Except for YouTube, I don't use any other service of theirs, too shitty.
The best way to make them back down is to show we won't bow.
The other day, I finally switched to ProtonMail. I still just forward my gmail inbox for now because I'm too lazy to go through all my accounts and change the email all at once. In due time, I will have switched. Fuck Google.