- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 07:27:12 +0000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
-------- In message <20121018061129.GG7517@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: >On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:15:51AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> Fine with me, provided you _first_ reduce the number of distinct >> U-A strings on the web to something reasonable, lets say no more than 25 ? > >One of my customers encodes them in logs to reduce log size, so basically >each new UA string gets assigned a 16-bit ID which is reused everytime the >same string is encountered. Last time we checked, we saw something like >30k different strings in one day worth of logs ! Some browsers emit all >the combinations of their plugins and versions, making the UA currently >useless. Many of the, now illegal in EU, tracking schemes use U-A as a major component in disambiguation factor, for exactly this reason. >Another benefit of getting much less different UAs is that their >identification string could significantly shrink then. Personally I think the U-A is just plain wrong and should be dropped. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 07:27:36 UTC