re: reCAPTCHA, linking this here, although it's now looking like there's not much room for hope: issuetracker.google.com/issues/450581755

might as well as just be the new normal for Google...

> Status: Won't Fix (Infeasible)

> This issue seems to be outside the scope of Issue Tracker. The Issue Tracker is a forum for end users to report bugs and request features. I recommend it to you to ask technical questions on Stack Exchange sites which are best suited for this type of questions.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

WAT

WTF

since when Stack Exchange is Google's developer central!?

so basically we were told to "piss off" using the most inaccurate argument possible

in the documentation where they linked this issue tracker they *do* mention and link StackExchange. It does look strange in a way, I'd perhaps expect them to try to use their own services for this, but maybe they realized SE was much more popular within the groups that would use such a thing...

it's like Toyota telling me to consult a car forum when inquired if my Corolla is affected by a recall over their faulty ECU code

tomman: I'm scratching my head because I can understand they don't want to do the "helping identifying what does not work" part in that place, but at the same time this *is* a bug in reCAPTCHA

well, who has Liam Proven's on speed dial? :D

tomman: if it's Toyota, I'd just assume it has SUA :-P

tomman: you know, I was seriously considering pinging him, just because he has written about similar stuff, so maybe he'd be interested in the datapoint

So is this affecting only us or is Pale Moon also afflicted?

I've been checking Pale Moon forums, so far no reports there

forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=…96&p=266266&hilit=recaptcha#p266266 hmmm, this was filled recently

so either it does support what is causing this, or supports fewer enough things that some fallback works, or google has some special case for Pale Moon?

the user on that one claimed that by tampering with UA strings he managed to get past the issue

question is: did they pass reCAPTCHA or did they avoid reCAPTCHA?

in the newsgroup some people are saying a *windows* Firefox 128.0 UA string makes web search work, which I guess means it doesn't show the reCAPTCHA test page, but that it'd just be broken in the same way were it shown?

nope, fooling www.gstatic.com with a FF68 UA doesn't work

never mention anything of this at Certain IRC Users, or you will be accused of being a "paranoid rant guy" and "Google doesn't owe anything to you, you don't have a contract with them"

Oh, I do have a contract with them, it's the Terms of Service or whatever it's called.

are we talking of google search? if so, forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=3134596

reCAPTCHA. which is included in the "We think you're a bot" page of Google Web Search

...and in like 50% of the Internet that doesn't use Clownflare's Turnstile

in my country it's widely used, from banks to government sites

yes, it's hitting me as well.

startpage itself does not need JavaScript, though some parts may. images, display, but you need JS to "click" them...

If only we could find where that change to postMessage() was actually baked into the standards...

that specific 2-param variety is documented, but not when it was introduced

(and in fact most sites don't even document it!)