BrowserForge

---

What BrowserForge actually does

Generates header sets and fingerprints that are internally consistent — a user agent, its client hints, its accept-language and its screen metrics agreeing — instead of sampling each field independently.

What BrowserForge's maintenance signals mean

pushed_at reads 2026-02-26, which is 169 days before the field check and therefore inside the 90-to-365-day band this rubric calls SEMI. SEMI is the first edition's ACTIVE bucket after it was split in two, and the split exists because a quarter of silence in this field is a fact worth printing rather than absorbing.

A SEMI entry is not a warning and not a recommendation. It is a request to look: open the commit history and see whether the gap is a maintainer between jobs, a project that has reached a stable shape and stopped needing changes, or an abandonment that has not yet crossed a threshold. All three produce the same field value, and this register cannot tell them apart — it can only make sure you know the gap is there.

No release was captured for this entry, which this register records as unknown rather than as none. The distinction matters more than it looks: a project with no tags and a project whose tags the sweep failed to read produce the same blank cell, and printing them as the same fact would be the register asserting something it has not measured.

Where BrowserForge sits in this catalogue

BrowserForge is filed in section 02, automation stealth plugins, patches & cdp-leak fixes, whose scope is this: Patches and plugins for Puppeteer, Playwright and Selenium, plus the proxies and cursor libraries that sit beside them. An entry sits in exactly one section here. Where a project could defensibly go in two, it is placed where a reader would look for it first rather than where it fits most tidily, and that is an editorial decision rather than a measured one.

Filed beside it in the same section: ghost-cursor (ACTIVE), HumanCursor (NRND), fingerprint-suite (Apify) (ACTIVE). Comparing an entry against its own section-mates is more informative than comparing it against the catalogue as a whole, because everything in a section is answering roughly the same question and the differences left over are the ones that matter.

It is published under Apache-2.0, alongside the rest of the Apache-2.0 entries in this register, and it sits with everything else currently marked SEMI. Read those two facets together: a permissively licensed project that stopped shipping is not a safer dependency than a copyleft one that did not, and a filter on one axis alone will tell you the wrong thing.

Substitutes for the same job, with no claim that either is better: fingerprint-suite (Apify). The alternative relation is symmetric and carries no ranking, because this register publishes no ranking of any kind. The full BrowserForge comparison table sets all of them side by side on licence, push date, release cadence and state.

What to settle before you adopt BrowserForge

Consistency is generated from a distribution that has its own age, so an old distribution produces coherent but dated devices. Check what browser versions the bundled data covers before you rely on the output looking current.