I don’t have a FreeBSD machine handy right now but I just switched user agent to FreeBSD amd64 on a Linux machine with Chromium 95 and have no issue with the front page or logging into chase.com. I have rarely encountered issues using this Linux/X11 setup on chase.com for years.
Is it possible they are using an ancient browser and incorrectly assuming it’s the OS part of the user agent?
It looks like Firefox but there's just so many small browsers these days. Honestly I'd need to see the offending code. If it's user agent testing, those strings should still be readable even in a compressed js unless they run it through an obfuscator
User-Agent may be determined on a webserver/proxy level and request redirected silently to a page with JS just showing the banner. It does not have to be based on JS checking anything.
Probably using qutebrowser or something else like that.
If there's active blocking based on OS (from replies in this thread, evidence seems to be slim) then that's not great, but this seems to be pretty one-sided so far.
I see this from the pretty-printed version
function a() {
return /Android|webOS|iPhone|iPad|iPod|BlackBerry|IEMobile|Opera Mini/i.test(navigator.userAgent) ? "Device" : "Desktop"
}
Using your bank's mobile webapp is very useful when they, for some god awful reason, decide to use SafetyNet.
No User-Agent switcher required.
They too mention Linux so it's possible they aren't aware of the difference.
It's possible "Linux" is allowed, but not *nix/Unix?
Everything in this article and it's supporting evidence is a stretch and should be evaluated very carefully.