On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:26 PM Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 01:51:07PM +0200, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > Does reporting "Linux aarch64" have significant concrete benefits to
> > users? Would actual presently-existing app download pages break if,
> > for privacy, we always
On 2/18/2021 3:51 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
As for the CPU architecture on Linux, on Mac and Windows we don't
expose aarch64 separately. (On Windows, consistent with Edge, aarch64
looks like x86. On Mac, aarch64 looks like x86_64 which itself doesn't
differ from what x86 looked like.)
As an
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 01:51:07PM +0200, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Does reporting "Linux aarch64" have significant concrete benefits to
> users? Would actual presently-existing app download pages break if,
> for privacy, we always reported "Linux x86_64" on Linux regardless of
> the actual CPU
We currently expose the major version of Android and the CPU
architecture on Linux in every HTTP request.
That is, these are exposed to passive fingerprinting that doesn't
involve running JS. (On Android, the CPU architecture is exposed via
JavaScript but not in the HTTP User-Agent string.
4 matches
Mail list logo
