> Epiphany uses Webkit-GTK. In a certain sense of the word, this is indeed an off-the-shelf library, but only in the same sense that Google Chrome uses off-the-

> Epiphany uses Webkit-GTK. In a certain sense of the word, this is indeed an off-the-shelf library, but only in the same sense that Google Chrome uses off-the-shelf Blink. And yet nobody would accuse Google of this. The reason why is actually the same reason why that comparison doesn't make sense. Chrome and Blink are separate projects in name only, to allow for an easier separation of concerns so people can use Blink, but really they are part of the same thing. > I don't know that it's viable to work around something like that without cooperation from Google. It would be a constant cat-and-mouse game, with Google having the upper hand. I wasn't suggesting figuring out what they were doing so you could fool them, I was suggesting figuring out what they were doing so the same separations could be attempted and they could be petitioned for inclusion. Of course they're going to try to block a browser that tries to circumvent their detection of browsers to increase security, all anyone does by attempting to circumvent that is confirm they are the group Google are attempting to block, or at least aligned. What this announcement really is is Google saying you need to use an authentication app to log in to their services, and that app happens to be Chrome, Safari, Edge or Firefox. People might already be using those and not notice, and other people might need to install those to authenticate. This doesn't even affect search. I'm having a hard time getting worked up about people not being able to use whatever random software they want to work as an authentication tool for Google's services. Don't use Google's services or just use one of those browsers to authenticate, problem solved.