Quote
gdv
(1) Is this an issue on the Hotmail end or the KM end (or maybe some of both)? I don't understand why KM works on Hotmail when spoofed as FF User Agent but doesn't work with the default KM User Agent.
What actually changes at that point to yield a functional difference? What is KM as KM not doing functionally that KM as FF does do?
(2) Seems like I recall this was an issue in the recent discussion re GMail as well (http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?1,82512,87508), and I assume there must be other sites that are problematic. So do those of you using KM as FF for Hotmail or GMail (or any other sites) simply leave it that way all the time? If so, what problems (if any) does that cause? (In other words, what are the disadvantages of just leaving the KM User Agent as FF all the time?)
Thanks!
Quote
gdv
I've had a couple questions about this rumbling around in my head and this seems like a good place to ask them.
(1) Is this an issue on the Hotmail end or the KM end (or maybe some of both)? I don't understand why KM works on Hotmail when spoofed as FF User Agent but doesn't work with the default KM User Agent.
Quote
gdv
I'm guessing I don't have an accurate understanding of what changing the User Agent does, but I've thought of it as the browser simply saying, "I'm Firefox" instead of saying, "I'm K-Meleon."
Quote
gdv
But what happens with Hotmail doesn't seem as simple as just how the browser identifies itself.
Quote
gdv
Apparently there are actual functional differences as well. (???)
When I go to Hotmail with the KM User Agent, I get the initial message that some functionality may not work right if I proceed with KM. But when I proceed, most things seem to work OK.
But one thing that doesn't is editing an email that I had drafted and saved earlier. When I try to edit the draft, I can change the intended recipient or the Subject, but I can't get a cursor in the text space (i.e., that space in th UI seems unresponsive). But if I switch the User Agent to FF (without even logging off Hotmail), I'm good to go.
What actually changes at that point to yield a functional difference? What is KM as KM not doing functionally that KM as FF does do?
Quote
gdv
(2) Seems like I recall this was an issue in the recent discussion re GMail as well (http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?1,82512,87508), and I assume there must be other sites that are problematic.
Quote
gdv
So do those of you using KM as FF for Hotmail or GMail (or any other sites) simply leave it that way all the time? If so, what problems (if any) does that cause? (In other words, what are the disadvantages of just leaving the KM User Agent as FF all the time?)
Quote
disrupted
some sites are just plain stupid with their identifiers but they don't necessarily have bad intentions.
for example: yahoo mail; they tell you your browser is not supported, that's an indication of a bad sniffer.. however all your mail features will work normally without altering your user-agent.. so they are stupid but they are not forcing you to use a specific browser(s) to access their email; albeit yahoo has this dumb cookie thing with advertisers issue when previewing image attachments.. so they are still evil.
what happens with hotmail is outrageous. they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out.. all you can do is read email. lots of regular users do not realise they can still use their not-so-popular-browsers by changing the user-agent. they like their browsers but discover that they are getting out-casted by many sites. what do they do? they eventually dump the programs that they prefer and opt for the ones always listed on those "popular" sites. more savvy users will spoof their agent permanently to end this headache.. which just like gunter and kko have stressed out- will simply give a pretence to them: the whole world just uses those 3 or 4 browsers.. what's the big deal then?
the only solution i see for this is a complaint letter. if they get enough; they'll understand that people are no fools and that that game is over. they asked for feedback..so there it is.
every site that adopts the same policy like hotmail's should be contacted with a hate-mail. another example is facebook..
the other idiots like yahoo should get more polite complaints.
don't just spoof your agent.. let them know how smart you are and how stupid they are.
Quote
disrupted
they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out..
(5)I'm guessing "baring" is a typo, but I can't figure out what it's supposed to say. ???Quote
guenter
Since the baring is not part of the HTML specifications the problem is their bug.
(6)Since I'm pretty new to both KM and this UA issue, I don't understand what you're getting at here, guenter (although I imagine disrupted does) -- Would you please clarify?Quote
guenter
Quote
disrupted
they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out..
Try to change "general.useragent.vendor" - only Geckos & khtml can do that info.
Try empty or outright delete pref. - Firefox does not have it.
It is the only give away I know.
Quote
Try a Google search for "Unsupported Browser" some time, and see how many sites that were rude to the Googlebot got indexed under their "Get a better browser, loser" brushoff page rather than their real content.
Quote
guenter
Quote
disrupted
they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out..
Try to change "general.useragent.vendor" - only Geckos & khtml can do that info.
Quote
guenter
(4) "Get a better browser, loser"
Quote
guenter
(5) "baring" is a typo? - I do not speak English.
I mean a verb that uses bar, barrier ( and ing for doing consistently)
Creating a bar or barrier or border to keep them out. Maybe "exclude/excluding"?
Quote
guenterQuote
guenter
Quote
disrupted
they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out..
Try to change "general.useragent.vendor" - only Geckos & khtml can do that info.
[gdv edit: following italics added back into quote from above by gdv]
Try empty or outright delete pref. - Firefox does not have it.
It is the only give away I know.
Some new browser scripts used in switches can sniff a spoofing K-Meleon.
My guess was that the value of general.useragent.vendor is K-Meleon's give-away.
The value can be changed via about:config.
Quote
gdv
Thanks for your reply, guenter!
Quote
guenter
(4) "Get a better browser, loser"
That's cute; I like that! [+ insert winking smiley that I still can't find] Now, let's shorten it to an acronym: GABBL!
Quote
guenter
(5) "baring" is a typo? - I do not speak English.
I mean a verb that uses bar, barrier ( and ing for doing consistently)
Creating a bar or barrier or border to keep them out. Maybe "exclude/excluding"?
Ahhh...! Now I get it! (Like so many things, it's obvious once you see it!)
Yeah, English has all kinds of special rules and exceptions. If there were a verb "to bare" in English, then "baring" would be the gerund, or present participle form (ending in -ing), but you meant the verb "to bar" as in "to block/prevent/exclude" and in English you often have to double a consonant at the end of a word before adding "ing" --- so in this case, it would be spelled "barring."
But I wouldn't say you don't speak English. In fact, with your spelling, grammar, and syntax, I wouldn't have been surprised if it was your native language!!! (...which is what, BTW, if you don't mind my asking?)
Quote
guenterQuote
guenter
Quote
disrupted
they have deliberately coded their site so that if you're not using/spoofing the browsers they've specified; they cripple you out..
Try to change "general.useragent.vendor" - only Geckos & khtml can do that info.
[gdv edit: following italics added back into quote from above by gdv]
Try empty or outright delete pref. - Firefox does not have it.
It is the only give away I know.
Some new browser scripts used in switches can sniff a spoofing K-Meleon.
My guess was that the value of general.useragent.vendor is K-Meleon's give-away.
The value can be changed via about:config.
Maybe this is over my head (or maybe our language difference is tripping me up somehow), but I'm still not clear what your point is.
By "give away," do you mean something like a "tell" in poker that "reveals" the true browser, or do you mean a "concession" of some sort by KM, or do you mean something that would cause cumulative browser statistics to better reflect actual KM usage, or...???
Are you pointing out a difference between KM and other browsers, or suggesting a setting to change via about:config that improves functioning on problem websites, or...?
Again, thanks for your help!
Quote
gdv
By "give away," do you mean something like a "tell" in poker that "reveals" the true browser, or do you mean a "concession" of some sort by KM,
or do you mean something that would cause cumulative browser statistics to better reflect actual KM usage, or...???
Are you pointing out a difference between KM and other browsers, or suggesting a setting to change via about:config that improves functioning on problem websites, or...?
Quote
Gorilla no baka
setting to change via about:config that improves functioning on problem websites"[/i]
Quote
gdv
(1) Just to be 100% clear, if I change the User Agent in KM (or Opera, for that matter), only the website functionality changes and K-Meleon/Opera functionality doesn't/shouldn't change at all. Correct?
Quote
gdv
(2) I was surprised Hotmail would respond immediately to my changing the User Agent. I thought I would probably at least have to log off and login again.
But I guess that idea was based more on the idea that the initial "handshaking" between browser and Hotmail was where the screening of the User Agent occurred (maybe because that has been the only time I get the cautionary message from Hotmail or other sites about the browser not being supported or having reduced functionality).
Now, instead, my impression is that User Agent sniffing must be a more constant/ongoing, dynamic process and that websites can accommodate to User Agent changes (kko's "user agent switch") on the fly. Does that sound correct?
Quote
gdv
(3) If #2 is correct, then as far as any of you know, will most/all websites make this adjustment on the fly as Hotmail does, or does that depend on how they are programmed? (I'm guessing the latter.)
Quote
gdv
(4) kko referred to the limited functionality websites assign browsers that are not on their "approved" list as "safe mode" functionality. Is safety/security supposedly the general issue/concern that User Agent sniffing by websites is intended to address?
Quote
gdv
[I say "supposedly" because there could be other reasons/motivations/purposes such as ignorant and/or outdated programming technique or an intentional effort to influence users' browser choice (e.g., perhaps for financial gain, M$???)]
Quote
kko
Just by pretending to be Elvis, you won't become a better singer. grinning smiley
Quote
guenter
Ze guenter is German. Zat is why he does not speak English and does not know English spelling. & Ze spell checker vill not show him barring
Quote
guenter
1.) IMHO K-Meleon's answer to "navigator.vendor" informs the more modern sniffer scripts about K-Meleon's real identity. Consequence: they know and can exclude K-Meleon, if they want. I used "give away" like betray. I do not gamble but it could be a poker "tell".
Quote
guenter
If You encounter a site that recognizes that You spoof another ID - You can try to change or delete all prefs that contain the string "vendor". An official Firefox does not have a pref that contains the string "vendor".
Quote
kko
Well, referring to "safe mode" I just meant to say: Provide an application that will most likely run in older, less capable browsers (not having the latest bells and whistles). Of course, older browsers are less secure and this can be a reason to exclude them from online banking, for instance. But I wouldn't say it's the general concern. First of all, a user agent switch is usually based on a white list, not on a black list. That is to say, webmasters do not exclude browsers from their websites because they know that these browsers cannot display/handle their website correctly, they exclude them more or less unintentionally because the do not know that these browsers do display/handle their website correctly. In other words, it usually doesn't happen because of knowledge, but because of a lack of knowledge.
Quote
guenter
p.s. About: starts several URLs inside the browser. For a list go to the URL about:about. Not all function - some require a parameter - and some were redundant and were destroyed when the chrome was adapted to K-Meleon.
Quote
disrupted
i was just stating a point about how those sites are.. if you notice, atleast once a week you will find a post about a problem with a site that blocks out k-meleon and just needs a user-agent switch. it's frustrating.
Quote
gdv
guenter, KKO, and disrupted: ...Your answers should be flagged or archived somehow for easy access (maybe a forum sticky and/or a KM wiki entry)
Quote
gdv
I'm not a programmer, so most of this is new to me).
are there reasons a website might actually WANT to block KM, or other non-standard browsers?
KM wiki entry
Quote
Most of this site has been designed utilizing XHTML 1.0 and CSS 2.0
and this site can be viewed with any browser
that is compliant to these web standards.
Quote
xGrind
Change your User Agent to Firefox 2.0
Tools -> User Agent -> Firefox 2.0
Quote
panzer
Disrupted, did you ever consider using a different mail provider?
No, they should look for "Gecko", the rendering engine.Quote
jmillar
It's not a bug IMHO, it's just shoddy coding. ColdMail should look out for the 'Mozilla' string instead of the 'Firefox' one.
Quote
kko
Well, referring to "safe mode" I just meant to say: Provide an application that will most likely run in older, less capable browsers (not having the latest bells and whistles). Of course, older browsers are less secure and this can be a reason to exclude them from online banking, for instance. But I wouldn't say it's the general concern.