Cloudflare is reportedly blocking access to certain websites for users of Pale Moon and other less common browsers like Basilisk and Otter Browser. The issue seems to stem from Cloudflare's bot detection system incorrectly identifying these browsers as bots due to their unusual User-Agent strings. This leads to users being presented with a CAPTCHA challenge, which, in some cases, is unpassable, effectively denying access. The author of the post, a Pale Moon user, expresses frustration with this situation, especially since Cloudflare offers no apparent mechanism to report or resolve the issue for affected users of niche browsers.
A Hacker News user has reported that Cloudflare is seemingly blocking access to websites protected by its services when using the Pale Moon web browser, and potentially other less common browsers. The user describes encountering Cloudflare's "Checking your browser before accessing..." page, which typically precedes legitimate access but in this case never progresses, effectively denying access. This issue specifically arises with Pale Moon 29.4.1 (x64) on Windows 10. The user emphasizes that they have disabled all extensions and add-ons within Pale Moon, eliminating them as a potential cause of the blockage. They also note that clearing cookies and site data did not resolve the issue. The affected websites are served through Cloudflare, but the exact trigger for the block remains unclear. The user hypothesizes that Cloudflare might be targeting Pale Moon's User-Agent string, a piece of information browsers send to websites identifying themselves, speculating that Cloudflare may have a list of acceptable User-Agent strings and is blocking access from browsers with unrecognized identifiers. This suggests a potential incompatibility between Cloudflare's security measures and Pale Moon's browser identification. The user highlights the inconvenience this poses, particularly for users who rely on or prefer less mainstream browsers. The post implies a concern regarding the control Cloudflare exerts over web access and the potential for exclusion of legitimate users based on browser choice.
Summary of Comments ( 370 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42953508
Hacker News users discussed Cloudflare's blocking of Pale Moon and other less common browsers, primarily focusing on the reasons behind the block and its implications. Some speculated that the block stemmed from Pale Moon's outdated TLS/SSL protocols creating security risks or excessive load on Cloudflare's servers. Others criticized Cloudflare for what they perceived as anti-competitive behavior, harming browser diversity and unfairly impacting users of niche browsers. The lack of clear communication from Cloudflare about the block drew negative attention, with users expressing frustration over the lack of transparency and the difficulty in troubleshooting the issue. A few commenters offered potential workarounds, including using a VPN or adjusting browser settings, but there wasn't a universally effective solution. The overall sentiment reflected concern about the increasing centralization of internet infrastructure and the potential for large companies like Cloudflare to exert undue influence over web access.
The Hacker News post "Tell HN: Cloudflare is blocking Pale Moon and other non-mainstream browsers" generated a robust discussion with several commenters offering perspectives on Cloudflare's decision and its implications.
Several commenters questioned the original poster's (OP) assertion that Cloudflare was intentionally blocking Pale Moon and other niche browsers. They suggested the issue stemmed from Pale Moon's outdated user agent string, which websites and security services (like Cloudflare) use to identify browsers. These outdated strings can trigger security measures designed to block older, potentially vulnerable browser versions. This perspective was supported by anecdotes of users modifying Pale Moon's user agent string to mimic a supported browser, successfully bypassing the block. Some users even suggested this was a Pale Moon developer's responsibility to update.
Others discussed the broader implications for browser diversity and the potential for dominant players to inadvertently (or intentionally) marginalize smaller browsers. They expressed concern about the internet consolidating around a few supported browser engines, potentially stifling innovation and user choice.
Several commenters delved into the technical details of User-Agent strings and Cloudflare's likely methods for detecting and blocking outdated browsers. They speculated on the specific heuristics used, including potential reliance on lists of known vulnerable user agents. This technical discussion highlighted the complexity of balancing security and compatibility on the web.
Some users expressed sympathy for the OP's frustration but ultimately sided with Cloudflare, arguing that maintaining support for every niche browser is an unreasonable burden, especially given the security risks associated with outdated software. They framed Cloudflare's actions as a necessary step to protect the broader internet ecosystem.
A few commenters suggested alternative solutions, such as using a more modern browser or exploring privacy-focused browsers like Firefox with hardening configurations. They questioned the practicality and security implications of clinging to older browser technologies.
Finally, a smaller thread within the comments focused on Pale Moon specifically, discussing its development history, its relationship to Firefox, and the decisions made by its developers that might contribute to compatibility issues.
Overall, the comments section reveals a nuanced discussion around the balance between security, browser diversity, and the practicalities of web development. While some sympathize with users of niche browsers, the general consensus leaned towards understanding Cloudflare's decision as a necessary, though unfortunate, consequence of maintaining web security. The discussion highlights the ongoing tension between supporting a diverse internet landscape and protecting users from the risks associated with outdated software.