While we can’t comment on the specifics of any customer configuration, we do not block or challenge Firefox by default—either with our Bot Management products or with any other L7 security controls.
You can confirm this by signing up a free zone and making a request from Firefox.
That is, you're not saying "Firefox doesn't change the scoring at all", right?
0: https://developers.cloudflare.com/bots/concepts/bot-score/
1: https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/200170056-U...
You’re right, this is a form of harassment, and it needs to be recognised as such.
I used to work there, and there wasn't a global "do this for this browser" (except for a little bit to reduce annoyance specifically for the Tor browser).
It is almost 99% certain to be a site operator firewall rule based on the browser user agent. This may even be accidental, they may have been hit by an aggressive bot using a UA string that matches Firefox and the site operator may not even realise they've done this (if they use Chrome, which is likely).
I'm a Firefox user and I'm used to this treatment at every step of the way, no matter if it's about software, airports, opening a bank account so I can receive a salary, etc. Fundamental things everyone wants to do are being made hard to do the right way. It's always anti privacy, anti self repair, anti longevity/sustainability, anti user freedoms, anti whatever we ideally want in this world. Of course using Firefox is now suspicious.
Not saying I should have to accept that, but that's what it was.
Certainly not 'regularly'.
I also do really not experience it "regularly", but different people visit different sites.
That said, the one problem I get most often is this Cloudfare one.
There are several plugins for Firefox that make this easy.
Sadly I find it happens more and more often, even with important things like financial services.
What I haven't figured out yet is whether it's really the Firefox engine that is the problem or just that Firefox also provides better tools for blocking obnoxious trackers and the like. Maybe because I have those tools turned on by default more sites using obnoxious trackers break in Firefox than other browsers. In most cases that is a feature not a bug but it's frustrating when essential functionality on sites providing essential services gets broken as collateral damage.
On large international sites the likelihood that Firefox works flawlessly is pretty high. But a lot of regional service providers appear to kind of have given up on it.
Except for some boneheaded sites that refuse FF entirely ( https://business.apple.com is such an offender) I don't have issues with sites not working.
Edit: it looks like even Apple has got their act together now, it seems to support Firefox now too. Finally
So apparently Firefox is subversive and scary enough to make Apple refer me to Microsoft or Google to avoid it. I guess that's what passes for "Think Different" at Apple these days.
I'm not actually from Aachen myself, but nearby in NL and I work in Aachen nowadays and wasn't sure what username to choose.
If someone else would want it, I'm also fine passing it on. Dunno if there are guidelines on that actually but I'd consider an HN username like a domain name: finite, first-come-first-serve in principle, and hoarding is not cool.
It's an open source extension available for Chrome and Firefox. It allows to privately identify you're human, and is the process of going through IETF standardisation, so hopefully someday you won't need to install an extension for it. After you complete a captcha once, you won't need to do it again for a long time.
I'm not happy about installing extensions just to view some websites, but it'll make things less painful
1. https://privacypass.github.io/
2. https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/11500199265...
1. https://privacypass.github.io/
> Deanonymizing yourself just to appease cloudflare is not a valid solution
I'm not claiming it is a valid solution, I'm just sharing a possible workaround.
The Internet is a network with social effects. Whether "this didn't work" means "the website is broken" or "the browser is broken" has always been more about end-user experience and the wisdom of crowds than a more concrete definition.
A website broken only on Firefox works for 96.5% of users. I have personally had to make the hard judgment call (as a fan of Firefox!) to not spend 25% of our engineering debugging time on a problem only 3.5% of users encounter.
I totally agree with you. I think maybe an upper limit per ip (maybe a bit higher for tor ips) would be need to prevent DoS type attacks.
It's (literally) basic logic
1. Some site flags Firefox. 2. Not all sites flag Firefox. 3. Either every site flags Firefox or individual sites flag Firefox. 4. It is not true that every site flags Firefox (obverse of 2) C. Individual sites flag Firefox (disjunction with 3, 4)
* Changing to Firefox immediately displayed the Cloudflare error message
* Edge had no errors
* Chrome had no errors
* Safari had no errors
Edit 2: as another user has pointed out, this is most likely a firewall rule put in place by the website operator themselves.
Receiving a "you look like a bot" message when using Chrome configured to pretend to be Firefox isn't very surprising.
(Disclaimer, MSFtie, all opinions are my own)
> Please turn JavaScript on and reload the page.
> DDoS protection by Cloudflare
The perks of living in a authoritarian state which tries to limit your access to the Internet.
Unfortunately these days this could be virtually anywhere.
https://i.imgur.com/ZzExHt2.png
This setup program is signed with an EV certificate from DigiCert and hosted on an https site. No other hoops left to jump through except this awesome Catch-22 implementation, which leaves no actionable solution.
I have noticed cloudflare challenging me more and more often. I assumed it was related to privacy extensions like noscript, ublock, and privacy badger.
dom.enable_event_timing / dom.enable_performance_navigation_timing
I only figured what was wrong after a month of no access to gitlab and other websites.
One way to interpret that is they should all have the same suspicion rules for lack of popularity applied to them. One way Cloudflare's rules could be causing this is if there's some threshold for fingerprints-per-second under which any UA is considered sus, and Firefox's market share is so low that it tends to fall under that threshold.
In which case, what lwt hiker is asking for is special treatment for the browser because they believe the Mozilla project's browser has special value to the web ecosystem. Which they are allowed to believe, but let's be clear about when we're seeking special treatment vs. being treated like any other user agent.
https://developers.cloudflare.com/1.1.1.1/privacy/cloudflare...
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox-private-networ...
Basically archive.is has an issue with the way Cloudflare DNS does things. This will also affect DNS over HTTPS as Cloudflare is the default DoH provider in Firefox.
What about using another OS?
What about using another IP address?
What about other websites? Is the issue only repeatable with www.g2.com?
What about using mobile phone browser instead?
>If this behavior gets adapted on more sites, we can expect even more users leaving Firefox
But I will just not go to the sites instead of using something other than Firefox.
I then tried in Firefox and only got the delay mentioned in the article.
Note that I am also browsing via a VPN.
Except back then when you suggested alternative browsers, people were generally receptive once they saw the practical utility of features like tabs. Now when you suggest alternative browsers, people complain about tens of milliseconds more latency and insist on using Chrome for the speed. It's hard to blame them though, since the practical advantages of Firefox are slipping away as Mozilla focuses on more abstract advantages, like privacy, freedom, etc. Noble causes to be sure, reason enough for me to continue using Firefox even if it were a hundred times slower. But I think most people are looking for practical advantages; Firefox usage continues to decline and I don't have much hope for these trends turning around anytime soon.
Based entirely on propaganda from the one company that is rapidly taking control of the whole Internet.
Mozilla marketing focuses on that. Mozilla development still uses opt-out telemetry, experiments on users without consent and they still have Google Analytics on their websites.
I know that the internet is full of idiots and criminals. If they protect their service it's my benefit. It costs me maybe 2-3 seconds every morning, but then there will be 1000s of requests during the workday. If each of them were 0.1 seconds slower because their servers deal with nonsense my user experience would be much worse.
(I have no idea whether keeping cookies or using a different browser would avoid the visible challenge. I just don't care.)
Edit: I would really hate it if I had to do free Google captcha labor. Or fill the AWS one which always takes me 3 attempts to get it right.
