You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Replaces the Unsupported Websites section in browsers/faq.mdx with a measured site difficulty index. Each site's block + challenge rate comes from actually running stealth Kernel browsers against it, not from practitioner lore.
Methodology
For each of 31 sites:
N=5 concurrent stealth browser sessions
US residential proxy (different exit IP per session)
Navigate to the public landing URL only — no login, no deep navigation
Classify each session as success / challenged / blocked using vendor signatures (Cloudflare, DataDome, PerimeterX, Imperva, Akamai, Kasada, reCAPTCHA, hCaptcha)
This is a floor, not a ceiling. A site that scores 0% on an anonymous homepage visit can still be very hard once you add login, repeated requests from the same IP, deep navigation, or large concurrency. The doc says so explicitly and flags login-flow / at-scale benchmarks as future work.
Test plan
Mintlify preview renders the three tables + methodology block cleanly
#site-difficulty-index and #methodology anchors resolve
Cross-link from bot-detection/overview.mdx is unaffected by this change (none added in this PR)
Note
Low Risk
Low risk: documentation-only changes that don’t affect runtime behavior; main risk is minor confusion if the difficulty categorization becomes outdated.
Overview
Replaces the FAQ’s Unsupported Websites section with a Site difficulty index that groups sites by observed bot-detection friction on the public landing page (Hard/Light/Clear).
Adds expanded site lists under each category and an Info callout linking to proxy/headless guidance for cases where “Clear” sites still trigger detection.
Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit c55e4a6. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.
Replaces flat unsupported-websites list with a five-tier index covering very-hard through very-easy targets, with framing on how to interpret the tiers and a pointer to manual baselining.
Reframes the site difficulty index around an N=5 stealth + US residential proxy test against each site's public homepage. Three groups (Hard / Light / Clear) ranked by observed block + challenge rate, with detection vendor noted per site. Adds a methodology section and explicit caveats that this is a floor, not a ceiling — login flows and at-scale behavior are out of scope for this benchmark.
ulziibay-kernel
changed the title
Add tiered site difficulty index to FAQ
Add measured site difficulty index to FAQ
May 11, 2026
Keeps Hard / Light / Clear grouping but drops the percentage tables in favor of plain lists. The methodology section still describes how sites get bucketed.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Stale comment
Risk assessment: Very Low
Evidence from the current diff: this PR only changes browsers/faq.mdx, replacing an unsupported-websites FAQ section with a site difficulty index, methodology text, and documentation callouts. There are no runtime codepaths, shared libraries, configuration, infrastructure, auth, billing, permissions, or schema changes.
I also checked the update since the prior approval: it only changes the same documentation section from detailed tables/inline lists to short explanatory copy and bullet lists. That does not increase the risk level, so I’m not dismissing the existing approval. Because the PR is already approved, I’m leaving this as a comment rather than submitting another approval.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Stale comment
Risk assessment: Very Low
I assessed the current diff directly. It only modifies browsers/faq.mdx, replacing the unsupported-websites FAQ copy with a site difficulty index, short explanatory text, bullet lists, and an existing-style Mintlify Info callout. There are no runtime codepaths, shared libraries, config/navigation changes, infrastructure changes, auth/billing/permissions changes, or schema/data changes.
Codeowners review does not appear to be required because this repo has no CODEOWNERS file. GitHub already shows the PR as approved, so I’m leaving this assessment as a comment rather than submitting another approval. The updates after the prior approval are still confined to this documentation section and do not increase risk.
This PR didn't match the auto-monitor filter configured on your GitHub connection:
Any PR that changes the kernel API. Monitor changes to API endpoints (packages/api/cmd/api/) and Temporal workflows (packages/api/lib/temporal) in the kernel repo
Reason: This PR only modifies documentation (FAQ and site difficulty index in browsers/faq.mdx) and does not change any kernel API endpoints or Temporal workflows.
To monitor this PR anyway, reply with @firetiger monitor this.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Risk assessment: Very Low
I assessed the current diff directly. The PR only modifies browsers/faq.mdx, replacing the unsupported-websites FAQ section with a site difficulty index, explanatory copy, site lists, and an existing Mintlify Info callout pattern. There are no runtime codepaths, shared libraries, configuration/navigation changes, infrastructure changes, auth/billing/permissions changes, or schema/data changes.
Codeowners review does not appear to be required because this repo has no CODEOWNERS file. GitHub already reports the PR as approved, including an approval before the latest commit; this update does not increase risk, so I’m leaving the existing approval in place and not submitting another approval.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ulziibay-kernel
changed the title
![cursor[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1210556?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Summary
Replaces the Unsupported Websites section in
browsers/faq.mdxwith a measured site difficulty index. Each site's block + challenge rate comes from actually running stealth Kernel browsers against it, not from practitioner lore.Methodology
For each of 31 sites:
Headline results
Important caveats (called out in the doc)
This is a floor, not a ceiling. A site that scores 0% on an anonymous homepage visit can still be very hard once you add login, repeated requests from the same IP, deep navigation, or large concurrency. The doc says so explicitly and flags login-flow / at-scale benchmarks as future work.
Test plan
#site-difficulty-indexand#methodologyanchors resolvebot-detection/overview.mdxis unaffected by this change (none added in this PR)Note
Low Risk
Low risk: documentation-only changes that don’t affect runtime behavior; main risk is minor confusion if the difficulty categorization becomes outdated.
Overview
Replaces the FAQ’s Unsupported Websites section with a Site difficulty index that groups sites by observed bot-detection friction on the public landing page (Hard/Light/Clear).
Adds expanded site lists under each category and an
Infocallout linking to proxy/headless guidance for cases where “Clear” sites still trigger detection.Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit c55e4a6. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.