3 ms·

They've indicated they may: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/202#issuecomment-558294095 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issu

by jefftk 6y ago

They've indicated they may: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/202#issuecomment-558294095 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/202#is... Commenting in support of Chrome's proposal to freeze the user agent and provide UACH instead.

sneak 6y ago
UACH is worse than a header. The server shouldn't get information about the client. Unsurprisingly, UACH is spearheaded by an ad tracking company that benefits from a moat caused by minimally viable/workable browsers costing millions of dollars and dozens of developers to implement.
- SquareWheel 6y ago
  > UACH is worse than a header. It's not. The header gives up all information by default. UA-CH works by request-only, and allows the browser to determine how much to send. This is easily controlled via native settings or browser extensions. The API also requires a secure connection, and specifically forces the server to admit to any fingerprinting (or legitimate use-case of data otherwise).