I use Firefox and Firefox Mobile on the desktop and Android respectively, Chromium with Bromite patches on Android, and infrequently Brave on the desktop to get to sites that only work properly with Chromium (more and more often - another whole separate can of worms too, this…) And I always pay attention to disable google.com and gstatic.com in NoScript and uBlock Origin whenever possible.

I noticed something quite striking: when I hit sites that use those hateful captchas from Google - aka “reCAPTCHA” that I know are from Google because they force me to temporarily reenable google.com and gstatic.com - statistically, Google quite consistently marks the captcha as passed with the green checkmark without even asking me to identify fire hydrants or bicycles once, or perhaps once but the test passes even if I purposedly don’t select certain images, and almost never serves me those especially heinous “rolling captchas” that keep coming up with more and more images to identify or not as you click on them until it apparently has annoyed you enough and lets you through.

When I use Firefox however, the captchas never pass without at least one test, sometimes several in a row, and very often rolling captchas. And if I purposedly don’t select certain images for the sake of experimentation, the captchas keep on coming and coming and coming forever - and if I keep doing it long enough, they plain never stop and the site become impossible to access.

Only with Firefox. Never with Chromium-based browsers.

I’ve been experimenting with this informally for months now and it’s quite clear to me that Google has a dark pattern in place with its reCAPTCHA system to make Chrome and Chromium-based browsers the path of least resistance.

It’s really disgusting…

  • JonEFive@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Keep in mind that basic bots don’t render or process certain page elements - like javascript. So VPN plus noScript/uBlock plus obscured data plus no preexisting cookies and possibly unique fingerprint from all your previous interactions (depending on your privacy settings)… It all adds to possible bot behavior. In my mind, getting caprcha’d is a good thing. It may mean google has low confidence that it knows who I am.

    • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In my mind, getting caprcha’d is a good thing. It may mean google has low confidence that it knows who I am.

      That is possibly the most unique outlook I’ve read about today.

      There’s nothing good about captchas: it’s an insult to human intelligence, it’s forced unpair labor and each time I get one, I want to murder someone.

      In a normal world, your statement would be utterly insane. But in our dystopian surveillance economy society, it’s actually a rational and interesting point of view, and one that turns captchas into a useful indicator of how well you manage to evade said corporate surveillance.

      Interesting. Thank you for that.

      However, If you’re right and Googles serves fewer captchas to those they can track better and not just those who run Chromium as I suspect, it also means privacy-enhanced Chromium-based browsers don’t hold a candle to Firefox. That’s not great news considering Chromium is the new de-factor standard and some websites only work okay in Chromium.

      • droans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’ve never operated a public-facing website, have you?

        In the past 24 hours alone, I’ve had at least 344 bot attempts on my personal site. A handful are harmless crawlers but most are hoping to hit a vulnerability.

        Captchas are necessary to prevent malicious bot activity. It’s unfortunate that it also means it’ll be a pain for users.

  • Dave@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not necessary targeted like that. Remember Chrome sends a lot of information about the user, allowing them to more easily gauge if it’s a bot. Firefox hides a lot of information, blocks a lot of third party scripts by default, and even sends fake information for some things. For all intents and purposes, Firefox looks much more like a bot than Chrome.

    With that said, I use Firefox exclusively and don’t have anywhere near as many issues as you seem to.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re most likely logged into the browser with your Google account in Chrome. I’m sure they take that into account as well.

    • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Remember Chrome sends a lot of information about the user

      Remember, I use the equivalent of Bromite on Android and Brave on the desktop. Those are not Chrome: they’re heavily privacy enhanced. By your theory, those browsers too should serve you more annoying reCAPTCHA more often, just like Firefox. But they don’t: even on those privacy-respecting Chromium forks, you can get past reCAPTCHA much easier.

      I use Firefox exclusively and don’t have anywhere near as many issues as you seem to.

      Try using Chromium side by side and the subtle extra difficulties of sailing through the Googlespace become quite apparent. As long as you stick to Firefox, you don’t realize that the Chromium experience is ever-so-slightly slicker on many websites.

      • El Barto@lzrprt.sbs
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Brave is a chromium based browser, so maybe chromium sends out something that let’s recaptcha know what’s going on.

        • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          maybe chromium sends out something that let’s recaptcha know what’s going on.

          Maybe. But in that case, that’s not a great sign that Brave respects your privacy. But I wouldn’t put it past Brave: they too are a for-profit and I don’t quite trust them either.

          However, the Bromite fork I run on my deGoogled phone almost certainly doesn’t make any privacy compromises and it solves reCAPTCHAs more easily than Firefox Mobile.

          • El Barto@lzrprt.sbs
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Any Web browser that claims privacy and security while using chromium as its base isn’t worth the risk, they may have implemented fixes and added their own proprietary code, but it’s still chromium and Google most likely hides a bunch of stuff from devs so they can’t mess with it.

            • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Bromite is not proprietary. But yeah, the chromium codebase is huge, it may be possible that certain bad parts were not found by the fork maintainer

            • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              it’s still chromium and Google most likely hides a bunch of stuff from devs so they can’t mess with it.

              Chromium is open source.

              • El Barto@lzrprt.sbs
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s still made by Google, tho, so can you really trust that there’s no hidden shit? This is a company that is trying to create a monopoly over website access.

  • Lobo6780@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just use captcha buster extension in Firefox, captchas are just stupid and it makes more problems for humans than for robots.

    • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      especially the newer ones that look like trying to see nipples on scrambled cable in the 90s.

      My eyes are already shit that I can barely make out the normal images, how the fuck do you expect me to make out this god damn LSD fever dream shit?

  • prole@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You may have turned on a setting in Firefox that is meant to obscure your browser fingerprint. For me, it seems to force more captchas for me.

    I kept the feature on though, because when I signed into Google and got the notification of a new sign-in on my phone, it thought my OS was Windows NT (it’s Linux) so it seems to at least kind of work.

    I forget what the setting was off the top of my head (in about.config I think), but could look into it if anyone is curious.

    Edit: went and found info on it. It is not just “Enhanced Tracking Protection.” It is specifically about blocking your browser fingerprint: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-protection-against-fingerprinting

  • redimk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s weird, I use Waterfox and I occasionally get to do some kind of “puzzle”, but other times I just need to click the reCaptcha and it will confirm itself (with the green check)

    Ironically, when I use Vivaldi, the captcha doesn’t even load, and when it loads, it says it’s wrong regardless of the answer I give it, so I’m always locked and that’s quite literally the only reason I stopped using Vivaldi.

    On Edge I need to fill in puzzles ALL THE TIME, that’s also why I stopped using Edge (apart from the bloatware and the uBlock not working there)

  • mtchristo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    My experience was that when solving captchas where you select pics on the grid and other pics load and replace the selected ones within the same round. in firefox it tends to play those fade-in fade-out very slowly. while on chrome they appear instantly.

    Unfortunatly I can’t expand my obveservation just based on my own anecdotal experience. have you noticed the same behaviour ?

  • grilled_cheese_eater@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, you said your blocking google.com and gstatic.com? Try privacy badger, Google uses a million other domains to track as well (Google Fonts for example) and privacy badger will let you find and block those kinds from domains from tracking or at least from leaving cookies if they are required for the site to work.

  • Sky Cato@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thing that annoys me so much is why every damn website has to depend on gOoGle scripts to function. E.g : most of website depend on googleapis or ajax.googleapis. why don’t you just stop hotlinking everything to 3rd party shits. This is basically spread Google’s domination on web. Remember, those 3rd party libraries are not Free. They take visitors data and make you dependent on their services. So Google has become the gatekeeper of many websites.

    I have a website and I coded everything by hands. No 3rd party JavaScript and other 3rd party BS. It makes my website run so damn fast

    • noctisatrae@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What you’re referring to is in fact Google Analytics which allows a lot of app to collect intrusive insights on their customers.

      If you want to create an app today, you will use JS, Lemmy uses it, everyone uses it. It’s not dominated by Google, it’s just the standard for building web app today!

      • Sky Cato@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am not against JavaScript. I sometimes use JavaScript and I don’t see the wrongs in that. What I am concerned is why so many websites use 3rd party JavaScript. This is disgusting because you sell your visitors out. Besides you can’t control the content of 3rd party scripts and most of them sell your data and spy on you.

        • noctisatrae@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In the case of proprietary software yes, but using a CDN for delivering JavaScript is sometimes so useful for open-source.

          I see what you’re saying with Sentry, Google Analytics, etc… And it’s laughably hard to escape the influence of big tech in programming today, you are right!

          At least when you want to build an app as we know them know… I’m currently working with some other folks on making the web more decentralized through a database that shares his data across peers.

          Those peers are the user of the app. Let me tell you, the seeds are planted… just need to grow the tree!