Pale Moon forum

So I was wondering if there was an answer to this. I use Pale Moon to solve a Recaptcha and I have to solve no less than six puzzles minimum just to submit or login somewhere where a Recaptcha is used to stop a potential bot. Now if I us Firefox or Chrome, I just have to solve one or two tops puzzles and I'm through. All this despite me forging my UA with an add-on that makes it look like I'm using FF, and another add-on that supposedly does the same thing with JS and is a companion to the UAControl add-on I use.

So it's blatantly obvious Google is discriminating against any browser besides Chrome or Firefox. Which leads me to believe seen as how my UA forging has no bearing, is that Google is pulling some other signature from the browser to know if it's a real FF or Chrome browser or not. What could that possibly be? I'd really like to know, because now if I know I need to solve a Recaptcha, I'll just open that page with my plain vanilla FF install. I have grown tired of solving puzzle after puzzle after puzzle. Very frustrating and really pisses me off when FF can solve it in one or two gos and I'm done.

F22 Simpilot wrote:So it's blatantly obvious Google is discriminating against any browser besides Chrome or Firefox.

This is the conclusion we have come to as well - there is no technical limitation other than "Google says so". So, unfortunately, the only entity who can change this behavior is Google.

Isengrim wrote:So, unfortunately, the only entity who can change this behavior is Google.

Not entirely.

Part of the issue is whether you are logged into a google account on the browser or not -- they DO check that, and will present a more normal experience if so (because you're giving them profile data which is the whole point of providing reCAPTCHA to the world for "free").

And another party that can change this is the website you're visiting. There are plenty of alternatives to implement anti-bot measures that aren't discriminating against browsers not on a short list held by Google. Have enough people complain and webmasters may reconsider.

Moonchild wrote:And another party that can change this is the website you're visiting. There are plenty of alternatives to implement anti-bot measures that aren't discriminating against browsers not on a short list held by Google. Have enough people complain and webmasters may reconsider.

Seeing how 80% of the population uses Chrome, I don't think that's going to change any time soon.

So I understand that if you were logged into a Google account you'll get a better experience with Recaptcha. But I was wondering as it stands now why it is that when I use PM I have to solve at least 6 puzzles, but with FF or Chrome I only have to solve 1 to 2 puzzles. Mind you with FF or Chrome I'm not even logged into a Google account. So I'm thinking Google is pulling some signature from the browser. If we know what that is, then we can trick Google into thinking we are using FF or Chrome. And as I mentioned, I already use two add-ons that forge my UA to make it look like I use FF across the Internet. Though, I found out Github didn't like that. When I made an exception for Github to use the PM UA it played nice. Pretty crazy.

Heck, I don't even keep cookies and cache on exit. I don't use the password manager in a browser and I sure as heck won't log into my Google account and maintain that logged in presence as I traverse the Internet. In fact, my Google account is just for YouTube. Bad enough I have seen Google's HTML5 crap in my browser when ever I visit Google or what ever using the Foundstone HTML5 Local Storage Explorer add-on.

GigaWatt wrote:

Moonchild wrote:And another party that can change this is the website you're visiting. There are plenty of alternatives to implement anti-bot measures that aren't discriminating against browsers not on a short list held by Google. Have enough people complain and webmasters may reconsider.

Seeing how 80% of the population uses Chrome, I don't think that's going to change any time soon.

Yeah, more than likely won't happen. One thing I don't understand is that Google does offer an invisible captcha. I'm not sure on its ramifications or how many websites use it, but would seem more prudent as to not give your user a PITA to have to mess with.

F22 Simpilot wrote:Google does offer an invisible captcha

The invisible version will fall back to a normal version if it can't be satisfied by whatever check it does to the browser.

GigaWatt wrote:Seeing how 80% of the population uses Chrome, I don't think that's going to change any time soon.

So just because non-Chrome browsers are a minority, they don't deserve any consideration? I'm wondering why you aren't using Chrome yourself, then.
Have you -tried- complaining to webmasters? Or are you just assuming beforehand they won't be responsive to user feedback and not even going to try?

Moonchild wrote:

F22 Simpilot wrote:Google does offer an invisible captcha

The invisible version will fall back to a normal version if it can't be satisfied by whatever check it does to the browser.

Ah, I did not know that.

Moonchild wrote:So just because non-Chrome browsers are a minority, they don't deserve any consideration? I'm wondering why you aren't using Chrome yourself, then.
Have you -tried- complaining to webmasters? Or are you just assuming beforehand they won't be responsive to user feedback and not even going to try?

The thing I think may be a factor here is that while it seems prudent to contact these websites and let the know they don't work with x browser, I think it may in fact fall on deaf ears seen as how Chrome and Firefox are in the majority and so being the website will be like, "get with the times, kid."

That's my take on it anyway. As an example. I have tweeted to companies about problems before and have never gotten a peep out of them. Some have though to their credit. But like Starbucks. I told them that they have a case of lose bottle caps in my area from all kinds of stores and gas stations for like the last year. No tweet was given to me in response as a validation that, yes we know it, and yes we will fix it. They must have fixed it because I don't have issues with lose caps anymore. These caps are meant to make a *pop* sound so that you know it's safe to drink. Many didn't do that.

Another point here is that Recaptcha is like the go-to thing for websites, and that technology is Google's and Google's alone. Good luck swaying their opinion on Pale Moon.

So the short version is you're not even going to try, regardless of you having seen with Starbucks that it does make a difference even if you don't get a personal response.

You are right that webmasters easily choose Google reCAPTCHA because Google has made it very easy for them to use (set up in 5 minutes and forget about it), and that it's purely their technology. The risk is that Google will abuse that position to discriminate against alternative browsers (and that is what they do, exactly) because they publish their own. It's a perfect example of anti-competitive behavior; and that is an argument webmasters will generally listen to.

Moonchild wrote:So just because non-Chrome browsers are a minority, they don't deserve any consideration? I'm wondering why you aren't using Chrome yourself, then.
Have you -tried- complaining to webmasters? Or are you just assuming beforehand they won't be responsive to user feedback and not even going to try?

Actually, yes, I have... and their usual answer is "Well, it loads fine under Chrome FF and IE. Have you tried using Chrome?"... so I just gave up on the whole thing.

And this is actually the best case scenario. Most of the answers I've gotten were automated answers along the lines of "you're using and unsupported browser", "you're browser must be out of date, you should update to the latest version", "you're using an older version of FF, update to the latest", blah blah, blah.

And, as I mentioned in another thread, I do use Chrome... only when I have to, since I couldn't bother to write any more emails to webmasters... I'm not the majority of their users, so they don't actually care. If 99% have a great experience on their site, who cares about that 1% that don't... there will always be other users.

Moonchild wrote:You are right that webmasters easily choose Google reCAPTCHA because Google has made it very easy for them to use (set up in 5 minutes and forget about it), and that it's purely their technology. The risk is that Google will abuse that position to discriminate against alternative browsers (and that is what they do, exactly) because they publish their own. It's a perfect example of anti-competitive behavior; and that is an argument webmasters will generally listen to.

And we have no control over that, period.

I'm also a webmaster, don't use ReCaptcha BTW, but I can see the appeal from a webmaster's perspective. It's a "set and forget it" kind of thing. Users are happy, since they don't have to answer "complicated" questions (they weren't that complicated 10 years ago... but, whatever... social networks have basically spoiled users, but, again, there is nothing we can do about that), the webmasters are happy, since they don't have to change questions every few months... it's a win-win scenario in most cases, since the problem is diverted to Google's side... the side effect, as you've mentioned is... they can do whatever they want with ReCaptcha being the "de facto" standard captcha nowadays.

That's why I don't like services like ReCaptcha... you're basically relying on a third party do the job properly, make their captcha solution compatible with every browser... which is exactly what they don't want, since they have their own browser to develop and promote.

I for one will never implement something like that... but that's not how webmasters and web devs see things. "Is it easy to implement? - Sure. -OK, let's do it . - But what if they decided to make some changes and not be compatible with FF? - Well... we could always tell the users to just switch browsers temporarily, it's not such a big deal ."... and the temporary thing becomes permanent over time... unfortunately.

GigaWatt wrote:I'm more a B/W person, not that much into colors .

F22 Simpilot wrote:Not even cyanotype?

If google does track one go through captcha on one particular site then on another site, can deleting all cookie cache and other stuff on users end impede that?

you might be interested in this... captcha is much, much more complex than you may think!
The 'I'm Not A Robot' Checkbox Is Actually Absurdly Complicated, And Other Facts

blame digg for their weird url, weird formatting, etc.......

Moonchild wrote: ↑

2019-01-21, 15:33

And another party that can change this is the website you're visiting. There are plenty of alternatives to implement anti-bot measures that aren't discriminating against browsers not on a short list held by Google. Have enough people complain and webmasters may reconsider.

What alternatives do you suggest? I don't know much about websites and bots, but I am more than willing to complain about recaptcha to webmasters.

pale_moon_user wrote: ↑

2019-05-30, 02:36

What alternatives do you suggest?

I suggest you use DDG to do a search. (example)
Several articles in your results will likely list alternatives for webmasters to use.