3 ms·
That's a nice thought, but in reality lots of poorly coded sites out there do UA sniffing instead of feature detection. So lots of sites break (including many G
by hirsin 8y ago
That's a nice thought, but in reality lots of poorly coded sites out there do UA sniffing instead of feature detection. So lots of sites break (including many Google sites) if they think you don't have Chromium feature sets.
- ndnxhs 8y agoHonestly the user agent string should just be removed. The correct way to use it seems to be do not do anything with it so why does it still exist.
- spurgu 8y agoIf you don't have an "officially recognized" UA string some websites will assume you're a scraper/crawler/bot/ and rightfully so.
- threatofrain 8y agoThat's just a heuristic of the times. Soon bots will be much smarter than that.
- seba_dos1 8y agoThey already are.
- ndnxhs 8y agoIf I was ever trying to scrape a website that blocked my user agent I would just set the user agent to chrome on windows. Every library I have used supports setting whatever UA you want.
- drusepth 8y agoWon't lots of sites also break if you don't have Chromium feature set but report you do? A more descript UA here ("Brave but built on Chromium") seems magnitudes better than imitating a native Chrome UA to avoid bad code that specifically looks for Chrome/ium, no?