From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 08:26:19 2022 Received: (at 59546) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 13:26:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43002 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5oFf-00064o-CX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 08:26:19 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f173.google.com ([209.85.160.173]:46849) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5oFb-00064c-R2 for 59546@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 08:26:17 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f173.google.com with SMTP id x11so5048319qtv.13 for <59546@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 05:26:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sna3EaOFbOM/3Ri0RvMNZ7IpzAukmWL8FdyDngWwN2o=; b=FBv5oEFSL8mBBCCC50Ee/OoVngNUHFk6gcfw7P76nrdzCXutsfvjLeR6KzzvaH7QE7 HZ6qzU78p3Yhx7NXm43u4WNcx71ORX5BNZ6rpB0FLeYlL4JTAmo+zW2M2O1PiivBaJEo Dc0QKoXgc7Ll2etm27+OFsjVvYMPgRxjm58hZ+tZ/wNwRSCmeygIcgto140mIuWADzkw 1QG5MRq8zAuYp4avjaVegGFMEdsHmob994OX+PVZMJVxriJgpE03bZVSJzsRNR2qRSci EJUYy1ZbzrkxVULmcAQDDWe8g466bKfSKj3i2w+06dNx480mY4P7dDK3GgkDYSZmtGEa zXPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=sna3EaOFbOM/3Ri0RvMNZ7IpzAukmWL8FdyDngWwN2o=; b=iGeeAZdEDXdoe3HmNZtvtuar85v6Dpg1oWq14yGawWRycx4yXtsl+TbbSGaSzBDTy4 +77vhgWhNlaHhzuV6/xVMKluRLZG7VT6hNzBSkO1RUiwPfkJfdVtzR7s6t8vul9esBdQ +mh/j8ov9EOXouJcb7gZW+4BFbi35zMvwcx5RsIyJ7qOeVbav1h1NYuFMPMkRAtR3ZdJ y5naFwj4zbimPQuCDKiSbst2IGzY6FaPNy75hDzM9K2OgXxuMSvJ09OralLCTy23F/0U uUayAXQsOyF++tOmMltmsc19QcJ+ByN470iDkUJt+g5gLPxlpD0exgm0WWw9dfgdLw6/ PesQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmS0rElHFoiEfCp0W8/AMFOmc7PRCpkZT/rQp0DDewKTLDJnbqj hOFGpq9kgF2hi8hAYR8xiGaEg4A3lqi3kKae X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5FZYtBeQJmEq94Z1EjHbX4mKjEoeuxo1HRjhkXPh5n4AbNmd7bsReJVkzf0RQVfIrEA89gHw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1e92:b0:3a4:fb8e:f819 with SMTP id bz18-20020a05622a1e9200b003a4fb8ef819mr41742459qtb.52.1671110770066; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 05:26:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd (dsl-10-129-63.b2b2c.ca. [72.10.129.63]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bb21-20020a05622a1b1500b003999d25e772sm3422477qtb.71.2022.12.15.05.26.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 15 Dec 2022 05:26:09 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer To: "bdju" Subject: Re: bug#59546: qutebrowser and icecat stuck in infinite browser checks (cloudflare) on applicable sites References: <87h6xxcmmz.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 08:26:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: (bdju@tilde.team's message of "Thu, 15 Dec 2022 06:39:54 -0600") Message-ID: <87a63odci7.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 59546 Cc: 59546@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, "bdju" writes: [...] >> I've had that too with Gitlab when using Icecat. Sadly, it has nothing >> to do with Guix but with how Cloudfare and the website identifies >> browsers. >> >> For example, I had found out that by using a Windows Firefox 83 user >> agent, I was able to login into Gitlab (using this plugin: >> https://gitlab.com/ntninja/user-agent-switcher). I reported the issue >> to Gitlab, and they could apparently fixed it on their side (not yet >> deployed) [0] >> >> [0] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/345328 >> >> I think other sites or CloudFare must be similarly faulty, or require >> fingerprinting which is guarded against out-of-the-box in IceCat. >> >> Closing, as I doubt Guix has something to do with it. If you find >> something to the contrary, let us know! > I too have fixed it in the past by switching my user agent. I opened and > closed a similar bug some months or years back. That solution stopped > working. I have consulted with folks in the qutebrowser IRC about this > issue several times and it is not affecting everyone there, so it > definitely seems guix-related to me. Something about our packages must > make the browser(s) look odd to these infernal browser checks. That's a good lead; could you please test qutebrowser in Guix vs qutebrowser on another distribution yourself and confirm this hypothesis (that it works elsewhere?), and post your finings here? If you can do that and post your finding, I we can reopen the ticket, as we'll have something actionable to look at. -- Thanks, Maxim