4 ms·
Nope, thats it. Nothing to see here.
by macinjosh 9y ago
Nope, thats it. Nothing to see here.
- mirimir 9y agoLiterally. It won't let me read with Firefox in incognito mode. Bloody idiots.
- recursive 9y ago"We noticed you're browsing in private or incognito mode.". Huh... how can they detect that?
- hexane360 9y agoMaybe not being able to store cookies?
- recursive 9y agoAFAIK, Incognito modes do generally store cookies up to the point where you close your browser window.
- thatcat 9y agoYou're right, I checked the differences between ff and ff incognito on panopticlick.com and both have cookies enabled. I think it's the blocking of trackers/invisible trackers that the website is picking up on.
- mschuster91 9y agoSubtle differences in IndexedDB handling, for one: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31159316/detecting-preventing-firefox-indexeddb-invalidstateerror-caused-by-private-brows https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31159316/detecting-preve...
- mikestew 9y agoBeing kind of curious, I fired up Safari's "private window", and it worked fine. I don't have FF on this box, but I do repro with Chrome. The detection is in article.js, and a quick glance indicates they're checking if the cookies get disabled. It would seem that Safari does that differently than FF or Chrome, and pass the test.
- slaymaker1907 9y agoIt seems to work if you disable JavaScript.
- trendia 9y agoOn mobile, I was able to read it in incognito by using Reader mode (which disables all page CSS and Javascript.) This probably works on desktop too.
- mirimir 9y agoThanks, that worked :) I usually try that with paywalls, but this was a different enough block that I didn't think of it.