Rebrowser bot detector

---

What Rebrowser bot detector actually does

Tests specifically for the CDP-level leaks that driving a browser through the DevTools protocol introduces, rather than for the navigator-property tells that the older grids cover.

What can and cannot be measured about Rebrowser bot detector

This entry has no repository, so none of the usual repository fields exist for it — no push date, no release tag, no archive flag, no licence identifier. Its state comes from one measurement only: the register requested the address and recorded what came back. Anything in the range 200 to 399 makes a non-repository entry ACTIVE, and that clause is the one the first edition of the rubric did not have at all, which is why live page entries carried no state under it.

Read that for exactly what it is. It says the thing is reachable. It does not say the page still works correctly, because no HTTP status can carry that. Where a stronger signal exists — a repository, a version, a dated revision — this register prefers it, and where one does not, it prints the weaker signal and names it as weak rather than dressing it up.

Where Rebrowser bot detector sits in this catalogue

Rebrowser bot detector is filed in section 03, detection test pages & fingerprint scanners, whose scope is this: Pages you point a browser at to see what it gives away. This section is where a link register earns its keep: test pages rot faster than repositories. 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: Device and Browser Info (ACTIVE), TrackMe / peet.ws (ACTIVE), nowsecure.nl (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.

There is no licence field, because there is no source to licence — this is a live page rather than a code repository. It is grouped instead with every other entry the rubric marks ACTIVE, which is the axis that actually distinguishes entries of this kind from one another.

Substitutes for the same job, with no claim that either is better: Are You Headless, bot.sannysoft. The alternative relation is symmetric and carries no ranking, because this register publishes no ranking of any kind. The full Rebrowser bot detector comparison table sets all of them side by side on licence, push date, release cadence and state.

What to settle before you adopt Rebrowser bot detector

This is the complement to the classic grid, not a replacement for it: a stack can pass one and fail the other. Run both, and read a failure here as pointing at your driver rather than at your fingerprint.