Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90627 > unrolled thread

Re: Oh Gawd - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!!

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Oh Gawd - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!! Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 11:29 +0100
    Re: Oh Gawd - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!! Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-26 18:08 +0000
      Re: Oh Gawd - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!! John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-26 11:18 -0700

#90627 — Re: Oh Gawd - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!!

On 2026-08-17, rbowman wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 09:38:41 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:
>
>> If it is Cloudflare it is guaranteed to ruin some days. Cloudflare
>> doesn't support other than a few select browsers, at a few select
>> version ranges. Unless the site owner configures it to somehow let other
>> browsers bypass the "browser check"(*), you'll be left out of it even
>> with JS enabled. Anubis tends to be much better in this regard.
>
> Using mxlinux.org as the test case, I can successfully connect after 
> CloudFlare verification with Brave, Firefox, Tor, and Librewolf.  Lynx 
> reports:
>
> "Just a moment...
>    REFRESH(360 sec): https://mxlinux.org/
>    Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
> '
>
> That's expected. No JavaScript, no proof of work. Of course if you use a 
> browser without JavaScript in 2026 don't expect to do much on the web. 
> What browser are you using that is reject with JS enabled?

What you're missing here is that Cloudflare doesn't merely require JS,
they require a bunch of features only a few browsers implement. So even
Firefox and Chrome at earlier versions may falter, Pale Moon may work
now depending on what happened with Cloudflare, SeaMonkey may still fail
unless Cloudflare has changed something again.

Pretty much *any* browser with JavaScript support, unless it's just
minor modifications on top of recent releases from Firefox or Chromium,
can be assumed not to pass the Cloudflare challenge. I'm not saying it
won't work, I'm saying it's likely not to.

Last I tested was with SeaMonkey, but I don't really go check that
often, these days if a site goes the Cloudflare way, I just stop
visiting it. Less gray hairs that way.

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#90641

On 2026-08-26, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 2026-08-17, rbowman wrote:
>
>> That's expected. No JavaScript, no proof of work. Of course if you use a 
>> browser without JavaScript in 2026 don't expect to do much on the web. 
>> What browser are you using that is reject with JS enabled?
>
> What you're missing here is that Cloudflare doesn't merely require JS,
> they require a bunch of features only a few browsers implement. So even
> Firefox and Chrome at earlier versions may falter, Pale Moon may work
> now depending on what happened with Cloudflare, SeaMonkey may still fail
> unless Cloudflare has changed something again.

Seamonkey is still my preferred browser; I haven't liked Firefox's
user interface since release 29.  However, every day it's usable on
fewer and fewer sites.  :-(

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  In this world there are
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  two kinds of people:
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  from incomplete data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#90644

On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 18:08:50 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> Seamonkey is still my preferred browser; I haven't liked Firefox's
> user interface since release 29.  However, every day it's usable on
> fewer and fewer sites.  :-(

I've been using Pale Moon for years - FF forked to restore the classic
UI (from before they started badly copying Chrome's bad ideas) but a
more modern backend. Unfortunately, that's still not enough for some
websites, so I either do without those or open them in Chromium :/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web