{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243/events","html_url":"https://github.com/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243","id":89899741,"number":243,"title":"Whitelist mode for profiles, default to modern browsers only","user":{"login":"codyit","id":3223826,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3223826?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit","html_url":"https://github.com/codyit","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/codyit/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2015-06-21T11:39:43Z","updated_at":"2015-07-17T15:28:41Z","closed_at":null,"body":"RAS is great, however I notice the first thing I do after installation is to go click exclude for most of the old browsers since they break a lot of basic functions due to JS browser check.\r\n\r\nI suppose having random for every 30mins among the latest version browsers on latest version OSs is enough for me. I would further suggest it should be the default, because when you think about it from the fingerprinting standpoint,  Konqueror on BSD or Iceweasel on 32bit Linux are definitely gonna standout more unless the majority of the population are using RAS, so it becomes a fingerprint itself eventually unless you're also using something like Tor."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/comments/122312712","html_url":"https://github.com/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243#issuecomment-122312712","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dillbyrne/random-agent-spoofer/issues/243","id":122312712,"user":{"login":"dillbyrne","id":2903711,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2903711?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne","html_url":"https://github.com/dillbyrne","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/dillbyrne/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-07-17T15:28:41Z","updated_at":"2015-07-17T15:28:41Z","body":"Hey @codyit \r\n\r\nBe as blunt as you feel you need to be, I don't mind.  The thing about the whitelist profile is that it is still a spoofed profile so the sites are still not getting your real profile. It is recommended that it be a firefox based profile for maximum compatibility but you can change this.\r\n\r\nThe number of exclude checkboxes is tied to the number of profiles, there is no expectations tied to them. It is simply a one to one relationship. \r\n\r\nWhile it is possible to exclude them and you can do so. I would think the number a user should need to exclude to be small due to the whitelist. After some time it becomes obvious that site is causing more problems that the profiles and that it is easier to whitelist that  particular site.\r\n\r\nAlso the fact that you can select a specific profile means that if you don't want to use the whitelist or exclude problematic profiles you can select a compatible profile and do what you have to do on a site and then select what ever you had before it.\r\n\r\nGenerally If a site is not working with a recent firefox profile then it is your chosen options.\r\n\r\nThe main issue I have noticed with google owned sites when spoofing chrome is webp images.\r\n\r\nI know you appreciate RAS and you mean well. My hesitation with your suggestion as I have said before is that I strongly believe it will not solve your issue(s), that is what the whitelist is specifically for. \r\n\r\nHowever I am a reasonable person and it is obvious that a group of users desire this functionality so I will **look into** adding an option to invert the exclude process. Providing the overhead isn't too much, I'll add it.  It won't make the next version but I'll try get it into the version after that .  The option for it would be located under the preferences in `about:addons` since it would not be something that would change often\r\n\r\nWill that suffice ?\r\n\r\nNote: If this is added you may still have problems with some sites that you did not whitelist for certain options that you have selected or for some options that are not in the whitelist that must be unselected such as the cache options for example"}}