• Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    9 months ago

    As useful as Mozilla/5.0; AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.3

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Mine is Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0. Joke is, this is the trimmed version (about:config Xorigin and trimming settings) and some pages already have problems with it. If you strip out the OS part, pages like google.com won’t work anymore. Despite that you shouldn’t parse the UA string…

      • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        9 months ago

        Trick is I took out the actually useful parts like Chrome, Firefox, Edge, etc. And the OS. All the agents these days have AppleWebKit and Mozilla just so old websites that look for it don’t downgrade the experience.

        • 7heo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yeah, make your user agent absolutely unique. Too much entropy will surely confuse the shit out server side HTTP Header tracking. 😬

            • 7heo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Oh gee, I wasn’t aware there was more to it than the UA. Thanks for opening my eyes.

              Edit: I checked your link, most of the parameters on the test require client side execution. That (client side tracking) is absolutely unrelated to what (server side tracking) I was talking about, and is something you can control (by not allowing JavaScript, for example). Please do not confuse the two. There is literally nothing you can do against server side tracking.

          • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah this isn’t my UA but I’m just saying these parts are what’s considered the supported featureset rather than information about what software the device is running.

            • 7heo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yes, I get that point, but I also think that it’s tempting for the privacy-minded novice to think “the less information I provide, the better!”, while in actuality, it is better to provide “more” information: the most common UA, even if it means lying about your featureset. In this case, truly, more is less.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          Firefox doesn’t pretend to use AppleWebKit. It’s actually the only one which identifies itself correctly… mostly, at least:

          Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:122.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/122.0

          While about:support says “Window Protocol: wayland”. But that’s ok websites shouldn’t care anyway.

          It’s other browsers who send things like “like Gecko” to sneak past old browser-detection code.