On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 12:55 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@gnome.
> org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 19:14 +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> > > Note that they do the same with Chrome where we have a Fedora
> > > user
> > > agent, too. The reason why it works is that we put a logic in the
> > > user
> > > agent extension which removes Fedora from the user agent for the
> > > netflix.com domain. We could do the same for Firefox, but I think
> > > it's
> > > better to solve this with Netflix.
> >
> > FWIW, in WebKit we have a list of websites that we send custom
> > ("fake")
> > user agents to. E.g. we send Firefox user agents to all Google
> > domains.
> > We do not contact websites to try to get them fixed; it's a waste
> > of
> > time, we just add them to our user agent quirks list. So if Netflix
> > doesn't respond soon, then I strongly suggest patching Firefox
> > similarly. I'm convinced it's impossible to make *any* change to
> > the
> > user agent without breaking websites, so having such a quirks list
> > is
> > going to be important for some other website sooner or later. I'm
> > actually surprised it hasn't caused any problems prior to now.
>
> Haha this is funny. So in effect the reported UA is completely
> unreliable but websites continue to rely upon it and use it to
> disenfranchise users.
>
> Am I understanding this correctly?
Yes.
Dan
_______________________________________________
desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
