I don't see why such animosity. Many legit companies (which is the only type of enterprise we deal with) have legit automation use-cases and require solutions to do that against walled gardens and information gatekeepers. We believe whatever a human can do with a computer, in public sites, should be automatable with a machine. There's no difference. A browser like that does not DDOs anyone.
We're looking to deal with companies that have serious automation and scraping challenges. There are other solutions out there that are less robust and more transparent on how they bypass protections. We chose to keep ours tight to protect our clients and provide the best enterprise support we can.
sounds good. As you can probably imagine, I also come from a lot of experience in the space :) But fair enough, everyone has their own opinion on what is more or less painful to implement and maintain and the associated pros and cons. We're tailored to very specific use cases that require scale and speed, so the route we took makes the most sense. I can't obviously share details of our implementation as it'd expose our evasions. And this is the exact problem of open source alternatives like camoufox and the now defunct puppeteer-stealth.
we fix leaks and bugs of automation frameworks, so we don't have that problem. The approach of using the user's browser, like yours, is that you will burn the user's fingerprint depending on scale.