Avatar for Username

Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

Denne tråden ble arkivert. Still et nytt spørsmål dersom du trenger hjelp.

Firefox 16.0.2 advertises User-Agent string with "Firefox/16.0" without the patch-level version

  • 3 svar
  • 1 har dette problemet
  • 1 view
  • Siste svar av philipp

chris@christopherschultz.net
chris@christopherschultz.net
more options

I'm running Firefox 16.0.2 on Mac OS X 10.8.2.

"About Firefox" reports that I'm on the "release"update channel.

The User-Agent string is "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/16.0"

Why does the User-Agent string not say "16.0.2" instead of "16.0"? I know that if I follow a different update channel (like aurora, etc.), I'll get a shortened version-number in my UA string, but since I'm on the "release" update channel, I figured that when I got 16.0.2 the UA string would say "16.0.2".

Note that I've never tried to forge my UA string nor do I have any plug-ins that I can imagine would mutate the UA string.

I'm running Firefox 16.0.2 on Mac OS X 10.8.2. "About Firefox" reports that I'm on the "release"update channel. The User-Agent string is "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/16.0" Why does the User-Agent string not say "16.0.2" instead of "16.0"? I know that if I follow a different update channel (like aurora, etc.), I'll get a shortened version-number in my UA string, but since I'm on the "release" update channel, I figured that when I got 16.0.2 the UA string would say "16.0.2". Note that I've never tried to forge my UA string nor do I have any plug-ins that I can imagine would mutate the UA string.

Endret av chris@christopherschultz.net

All Replies (3)

philipp
philipp
  • Moderator
more options

hello chris, it has been a deliberate decision since firefox 16 not to expose the patch-level of the browser any longer, see bug #728831

chris@christopherschultz.net
chris@christopherschultz.net Eieren av spørsmålet
more options

Thanks, @madperson... I didn't realize that was for release versions as well. It seems I can no longer force my (internal) users to be up-to-date with Firefox at the patch-level, which is too bad.

I consider the matter settled but if you have any suggestions for how to sniff my user's patch-levels so I can encourage them to upgrade, I'd love to hear some suggestions.

philipp
philipp
  • Moderator
more options

unfortunately i'm not aware of any way to circumvent that - comment 27 in the bug report by a mozilla dev also says that it isn't possible to obtain that information by just looking at the http traffic (and even if there was a fancy way around that it would now apparently be classified as a privacy issue by mozilla and get fixed again as soon as this gets into the public domain)