Skip to content
All fingerprint checksAutomation surface

no notifications-permission headless bug

Check id permissions-notification-bug

What an ordinary browser yields

The two APIs agree; specifically, not query state 'prompt' alongside Notification.permission 'denied'.

What a detector infers

Two independent APIs describe the same underlying notification permission: navigator.permissions.query({name:'notifications'}) returns a PermissionStatus state, and Notification.permission returns a string. This check awaits the query and flags exactly one combination — state 'prompt' while Notification.permission is 'denied'. In a coherent browser these cannot disagree, because they are two views of one stored setting; the pair diverges in certain headless configurations where the permission backend and the Notification interface are wired to different defaults. A detector reading both and comparing them needs no heuristic — the contradiction is decisive on its own, which is why the combination became a well-known probe. Any exception during the query is swallowed and the check passes, so an environment lacking either API is not penalised.

How to resolve it

This is a property of the browser build and its headless mode rather than something to patch from page scripts — a build whose permission backend is coherent reports matching states. If you are overriding either API, override both from the same source of truth so they cannot diverge.

How is a headless browser detected?

Read in the wild by

PerimeterX / HUMAN

Implements exactly this pair — it calls navigator.permissions.query({name:'notifications'}) only when Notification.permission already reads "denied", and when that query resolves to "prompt" it sets a flag whose own constant decodes to the string "permission_denied", which is written into the EV2 payload.

stample/walmart/source/main.min.js — plain literals, no decoding needed: `"denied"===Notification.permission&&eO[eK(217)].query({name:"notifications"}).then((function(e){"prompt"===e.state&&(lW=mo)}))`. Same pair in stample/ifood/source/main.min.js qF(): `if(!hU.permissions)return void(pi=pB);"denied"===Notification[t(189)]&&hU.permissions.query({name:"notifications"}).then((function(n){n.state===t(190)&&(pi=pA)}))`, where qF's function-local base91 dict decodes t(189)='permission' and t(190)='prompt'. The flag it sets is `pA=jb("cGVybWlzc2lvbl9kZW5pZWQ=")` = "permission_denied" (vs `pB`="no_permissions" when navigator.permissions is absent), and pi is written into the EV2 payload object via `t[0]["eytOYT5NSVM="]=pi` — sibling keys in that same object are tagged "src":"EV2" in all_fields_map.json. Pair present in three independent deployments (ifood, walmart, totalwine); `_pxAppId = "PXO1GDTa7Q"`.

CreepJS

CreepJS, an open-source fingerprinting research demo rather than a production detector, awaits navigator.permissions.query({ name: 'notifications' }) and compares its state against Notification.permission, treating the exact 'prompt'/'denied' pair as a property it names hasPermissionsBug — gated to Blink engines and filed under its 'likeHeadless' heuristics, which it keeps separate from its definitive 'headless' bucket.

src/headless/index.ts (abrahamjuliot/creepjs, master): `likeHeadless: {` … `hasPermissionsBug: (` `IS_BLINK &&` `'permissions' in navigator &&` `await (async () => {` `const res = await navigator.permissions.query({ name: 'notifications' })` `return (res.state == 'prompt' && 'Notification' in window && Notification.permission === 'denied')` `})()` `)` — distinct from the sibling single-read property `notificationIsDenied: (IS_BLINK && 'Notification' in window && (Notification.permission == 'denied'))`, and from the separate definitive `headless: {` bucket (webDriverIsOn, hasHeadlessUA, hasHeadlessWorkerUA).

Every attribution traces to a published artifact. See the sources and their limits.

Nearby checks in Automation surface

See all 27 checks in Automation surface
Who builds this test

Clearcote is a browser built for fingerprint coherence

It is a Chromium fork, maintained by the same people who wrote this reference. It ships as a compiled browser rather than as a stealth script injected into someone else's — which is a description of how it is built, and is not an argument about how it behaves on this check.

This audit takes no position on how Clearcote scores on Automation surface checks, on this one, or anywhere else. It has no baseline corpus of other people's fingerprints to rank you against and no vendor scoreboard — nearly every check is self-referential, asking one browser the same question through two independent APIs and reporting whether both answers can be true at once. It runs identically on any browser, including ours. Run it on yours and read the result yourself.

See the other checks in Automation surface — the family permissions-notification-bug belongs to.