Plethora of broken Firefox addons

This is one of many messages I get when I install addons to FF.

Because of the new extension system on Firefox, most of the functionality of the Theme Font & Size Changer is not available any more. You can read more about this new system here.

Franky, it pis@es me off.

How do you feel about Mozilla?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons, but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

Andy

On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:29:17 PM UTC-6, wrote:
This is one of many messages I get when I install addons to FF.

Because of the new extension system on Firefox, most of the functionality of the Theme Font & Size Changer is not available any more. You can read more about this new system here.

Franky, it pis@es me off.

How do you feel about Mozilla?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons, but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

Andy

Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?

Thanks,
Andy (El Lago, Tx)

On 23/02/2019 02:33, wrote:
Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?



Have you heard of Gmailify? I could give you the full instructions here
but you don't seem to have enough intelligence to understand anything so
I won't do it here but I suggest watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQTwSYQX5tw

There must be many people like you in Chicago.!!!!!!!!!

G/L

X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2d34:: with SMTP id n49mr4345627qta.15.1550889228076;
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:aed:233d:: with SMTP id h58mr60769qtc.1.1550889228007;
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:48 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.albasani.net!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis .net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.gigan ews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m21no2715409qta.0!news-out.google.com!y15ni1709qta.0!nntp.google.com!m21n o2715399qta.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000go o.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:47 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.182.222.186;
posting-account=Snv7GQoAAACHeFuYLS-gRIJf2wafVDv6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.182.222.186
References:
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:
Subject: Plethora of broken Firefox addons
From:
Injection-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 02:33:48 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 20
Xref: news.albasani.net microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:504723



--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

wrote:
On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:29:17 PM UTC-6, wrote:
This is one of many messages I get when I install addons to FF.

Because of the new extension system on Firefox, most of the functionality of the Theme Font & Size Changer is not available any more. You can read more about this new system here.

Franky, it pis@es me off.

How do you feel about Mozilla?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons, but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

Andy

Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?

Thanks,
Andy (El Lago, Tx)

Apparently the warning you get from Yahoo mail isn't based on
technical details. The protocol support is there, and the
Yahoo people are using User Agent filtering. In other words,
they're just being snooty for the hell of it.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewto...yahoo&start=15

The hack there should make it work again.

Your bank site could be using one of the newer "flavors" of crypto
with TLS or something. There's a thing called CHACHA20, if memory
serves. And I've heard of some websites being so "narrow"
as to only support that option. Many other websites have
a subset "suite" of protocols where are "acceptable" for https
connections. Leave it to a bank to make things (nearly) impossible.

Naturally, a web browser which is not under constant and vigorous
development, will fall behind on stuff like this. As I understand it,
some browsers rely on the Windows SChannel for crypto, and then
the version of Windows makes a difference (a good browser plus
WinXP crypto might not be good enough). Whereas if the browser
code for the same browser was compiled on Linux, it might use
a crypto suite in the browser itself. Why the browser happens
to rely on the SChannel when it doesn't have to, is a mystery.
Yeah, it's fun to make Microsoft responsible for your broken
crypto.

*******

For the bank issue:

This page tests your browser. And gives details about
what it supports.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

It's possible you can use this one to test the bank
itself, and see if the protocols it accepts during
negotiation are limited to CHACHA20 or something
similarly modern. Each end has a list of acceptable
protocols, and they negotiate over what to do.
If there is no "match" between your browser and
the bank, a suitable error message will appear on
the screen.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/

There are some crypto standards which are badly
broken (cracked) - for example, some of the things that
old versions of Internet Explorer support, would be
laughably bad. Whereas an acceptable suite for the
bank doesn't have to be limited to just one line out
of a hundred choices. But, it's their choice to do it
that way, if that's what they want. (Paul would now like
to laugh at his bank, that wanted to protect accounts
with a three digit password, like 123. Bankers are
made of mostly cheese. A kind of Cheez Whiz.)

TLS 1.3 appears to have been finished some time last year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transp...curity#TLS_1.3

A browser like Seamonkey might have TLS 1.2, which is
still workable but not the best. TLS 1.3 has fewer holes
in it. Anything with SSL in it, shouldn't be used.
And for old browsers, they're coming up short on TLS.

Paul

Andy,

How do you feel about Mozilla?

Better question: Why are you bitching about Mozilla when you can (still)
choose to install a version of their browser which still supports those
plugins you want to use ?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons,
but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

How do you feel about Mozilla^wSeamonkey? :-)

And as Paul already mentioned, its mostly a problem created by the companies
websites, refusing to recognise anything else than what they want to see.
Heck, sometimes even just changing the user-agent header makes the problem
go away. :-(

How do you feel about Mozilla^wthose websites?


Personally I would love to see some more effort being put in putting the
encryption into seperate, generic DLL. It would allow people to upgrade
their security without having to change their front-end (the browser, mail
reader, etc. itself) too.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On Saturday, February 23, 2019 at 12:27:01 AM UTC-6, Paul wrote:
wrote:
On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:29:17 PM UTC-6, wrote:
This is one of many messages I get when I install addons to FF.

Because of the new extension system on Firefox, most of the functionality of the Theme Font & Size Changer is not available any more. You can read more about this new system here.

Franky, it pis@es me off.

How do you feel about Mozilla?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons, but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

Andy

Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?

Thanks,
Andy (El Lago, Tx)

Apparently the warning you get from Yahoo mail isn't based on
technical details. The protocol support is there, and the
Yahoo people are using User Agent filtering. In other words,
they're just being snooty for the hell of it.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewto...yahoo&start=15

The hack there should make it work again.

Your bank site could be using one of the newer "flavors" of crypto
with TLS or something. There's a thing called CHACHA20, if memory
serves. And I've heard of some websites being so "narrow"
as to only support that option. Many other websites have
a subset "suite" of protocols where are "acceptable" for https
connections. Leave it to a bank to make things (nearly) impossible.

Naturally, a web browser which is not under constant and vigorous
development, will fall behind on stuff like this. As I understand it,
some browsers rely on the Windows SChannel for crypto, and then
the version of Windows makes a difference (a good browser plus
WinXP crypto might not be good enough). Whereas if the browser
code for the same browser was compiled on Linux, it might use
a crypto suite in the browser itself. Why the browser happens
to rely on the SChannel when it doesn't have to, is a mystery.
Yeah, it's fun to make Microsoft responsible for your broken
crypto.

*******

For the bank issue:

This page tests your browser. And gives details about
what it supports.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

It's possible you can use this one to test the bank
itself, and see if the protocols it accepts during
negotiation are limited to CHACHA20 or something
similarly modern. Each end has a list of acceptable
protocols, and they negotiate over what to do.
If there is no "match" between your browser and
the bank, a suitable error message will appear on
the screen.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/

There are some crypto standards which are badly
broken (cracked) - for example, some of the things that
old versions of Internet Explorer support, would be
laughably bad. Whereas an acceptable suite for the
bank doesn't have to be limited to just one line out
of a hundred choices. But, it's their choice to do it
that way, if that's what they want. (Paul would now like
to laugh at his bank, that wanted to protect accounts
with a three digit password, like 123. Bankers are
made of mostly cheese. A kind of Cheez Whiz.)

TLS 1.3 appears to have been finished some time last year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transp...curity#TLS_1.3

A browser like Seamonkey might have TLS 1.2, which is
still workable but not the best. TLS 1.3 has fewer holes
in it. Anything with SSL in it, shouldn't be used.
And for old browsers, they're coming up short on TLS.

Paul

Thanks Paul.

I tried the hack and I get
Waiting for geo.yahoo.com

I think the developers at Mozilla have got a God complex.

Andy

On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 11:25:25 PM UTC-6, 😉 Good Guy 😉 wrote:
On 23/02/2019 02:33,
wrote:




Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?






Have you heard of Gmailify?Â* I could give you the full instructions
here but you don't seem to have enough intelligence to understand
anything so I won't do it here but I suggest watch this video:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQTwSYQX5tw



There must be many people like you in Chicago.!!!!!!!!!



G/L




X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2d34:: with SMTP id n49mr4345627qta.15.1550889228076;
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:aed:233d:: with SMTP id h58mr60769qtc.1.1550889228007;
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:48 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.albasani.net!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis .net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.gigan ews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m21no2715409qta.0!news-out.google.com!y15ni1709qta.0!nntp.google.com!m21n o2715399qta.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000go o.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:33:47 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.182..222.186;
posting-account=Snv7GQoAAACHeFuYLS-gRIJf2wafVDv6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.182.222.186
References:
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:
Subject: Plethora of broken Firefox addons
From:
Injection-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 02:33:48 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 20
Xref: news.albasani.net microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:504723








--




With over 950 million
devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is
higher than any previous version of windows.


Have you heard of Gmailify? I could give you the full instructions here but you don't seem to have enough intelligence to understand anything so I won't do it here but I suggest watch this video:

I think you have an anger management problem.

With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is
MUCH WORSE than any previous version of windows.

Try Linux, you'll be glad you did. :-)

On Saturday, February 23, 2019 at 12:27:01 AM UTC-6, Paul wrote:
wrote:
On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:29:17 PM UTC-6, wrote:
This is one of many messages I get when I install addons to FF.

Because of the new extension system on Firefox, most of the functionality of the Theme Font & Size Changer is not available any more. You can read more about this new system here.

Franky, it pis@es me off.

How do you feel about Mozilla?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons, but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

Andy

Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

Any other considerations?

Thanks,
Andy (El Lago, Tx)

Apparently the warning you get from Yahoo mail isn't based on
technical details. The protocol support is there, and the
Yahoo people are using User Agent filtering. In other words,
they're just being snooty for the hell of it.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewto...yahoo&start=15

The hack there should make it work again.

Your bank site could be using one of the newer "flavors" of crypto
with TLS or something. There's a thing called CHACHA20, if memory
serves. And I've heard of some websites being so "narrow"
as to only support that option. Many other websites have
a subset "suite" of protocols where are "acceptable" for https
connections. Leave it to a bank to make things (nearly) impossible.

Naturally, a web browser which is not under constant and vigorous
development, will fall behind on stuff like this. As I understand it,
some browsers rely on the Windows SChannel for crypto, and then
the version of Windows makes a difference (a good browser plus
WinXP crypto might not be good enough). Whereas if the browser
code for the same browser was compiled on Linux, it might use
a crypto suite in the browser itself. Why the browser happens
to rely on the SChannel when it doesn't have to, is a mystery.
Yeah, it's fun to make Microsoft responsible for your broken
crypto.

*******

For the bank issue:

This page tests your browser. And gives details about
what it supports.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html

It's possible you can use this one to test the bank
itself, and see if the protocols it accepts during
negotiation are limited to CHACHA20 or something
similarly modern. Each end has a list of acceptable
protocols, and they negotiate over what to do.
If there is no "match" between your browser and
the bank, a suitable error message will appear on
the screen.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/

There are some crypto standards which are badly
broken (cracked) - for example, some of the things that
old versions of Internet Explorer support, would be
laughably bad. Whereas an acceptable suite for the
bank doesn't have to be limited to just one line out
of a hundred choices. But, it's their choice to do it
that way, if that's what they want. (Paul would now like
to laugh at his bank, that wanted to protect accounts
with a three digit password, like 123. Bankers are
made of mostly cheese. A kind of Cheez Whiz.)

TLS 1.3 appears to have been finished some time last year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transp...curity#TLS_1.3

A browser like Seamonkey might have TLS 1.2, which is
still workable but not the best. TLS 1.3 has fewer holes
in it. Anything with SSL in it, shouldn't be used.
And for old browsers, they're coming up short on TLS.

Paul

I got the bank sites working on Seamonkey.

Andy

In message ,
writes:
[]
Had 1 more question. Yahoo mail won't work with Seamonkey but gmail will.

(I presume you _want_ to use webmail rather than an email client; there
_are_ valid reasons for wanting to do that.)

How much work would it involve notifying everyone of my new email?

How long is a piece of string?

It took me 6 months to a year - but in terms of actual _work_, hard to
say: I'd guess 6 to 8 hours, but that's very much a guess. I made a list
(in a text file as I tend to do so; you might want to make a table.
[Note: a table is _not_ a spreadsheet, so you don't need to do it in
Excel or similar; the table facilities in Word [for example] are far
superior. Now where was I ...) of _all_ the people I needed to tell; the
next columns were when I told them, and what email I'd told them to use;
and the third column was when they had written to me using the new
address. (And that _doesn't_ mean just replied to my notification email,
it means when they'd emailed me on some separate matter; lots of people
reply to a change-of-address email using the new one, but keep using the
old one for any _later_ emails.) The trickiest ones are not email
correspondents, but companies/websites; some of those are well-set-up
and thus easy; some are a pig. In a few cases, such as where they use
your email address _as_ your username, you'll have to accept that you'll
just have to set up a new account (or login or whatever).

Suffice to say that I decided (I had decided I'd do this if I ever had
to change anyway, some time before I did [due to the company
owning/handling the email domain playing silly buggers]) I didn't want
to go through this more than once, so registered my own domain: if I
fall out with the company handling it, I'll just transfer the domain to
another company, thus keeping the address and not having to go through
the telling-everybody exercise again. It costs me twentysomething pounds
a year for the mail handling, a tiny website (255soft.uk), and the
registration (which I made sure was in _my_ name not theirs, though they
handle it for me); I think some companies cost even less. (I'm with
tsohost who seem competent/reliable so far.)

I would imagine you should be able to get something like scientist.us
without any problem, or at least scientist123.us . (I'm constantly
surprised how few USAnians are proud to have a .us domain, rather than a
boring .com or .org one [which probably cost more too].)

Any other considerations?

Having your own domain looks a lot more professional (and trustworthy
too - not that I'm saying you're not, but certainly if you do any sort
of business/trade using it) than (or yahoo
or any of the other "free" providers). If you _don't_ trade, then OK, it
may seem a bit of vanity, but for less than the price of a silly coffee
or beer once a month ... (-:. [Do give some thought to the name though -
scientist, AndyLago, smithsplumbers, etc. - before registering it.] I'd
be wary of dealing with any company with just an @gmail address - same
as one who only give out a mobile (cellphone) contact number. [In UK,
mobile numbers are immediately recognisable (start with 07).]

Oh, and in most cases, if you _do_ get your own domain, you can have as
many addresses as you like (hence the reference above to what email I'd
given them) - in my case, for example; I mainly
use that for companies that want an email address, so if I'm dealing
with XYZ company, I give them - then at least if I start
getting spam to it (a) I know who isn't to be trusted to keep data
secure (or who sells it), (b) I can filter on (and thus block) email to
that address.

Thanks,
Andy (El Lago, Tx)
YW.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a
gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct".
- Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31

In message , Paul
writes:
[]
This page tests your browser. And gives details about
what it supports.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewMyClient.html
[]
Thanks for that; looks like a useful page. Pity it's fixed (wide) width
so I have to keep scrolling sideways, but I suppose I can't have
everything.
(It also sits there waiting forever for the top few things in my ancient
Firefox [27.0.1], but it's OK in Chrome [apart from the width thing].)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Never raise your hand to your children. It leaves your mid-section unprotected

On Saturday, February 23, 2019 at 3:11:04 AM UTC-6, R.Wieser wrote:
Andy,

How do you feel about Mozilla?

Better question: Why are you bitching about Mozilla when you can (still)
choose to install a version of their browser which still supports those
plugins you want to use ?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons,
but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

How do you feel about Mozilla^wSeamonkey? :-)

And as Paul already mentioned, its mostly a problem created by the companies
websites, refusing to recognise anything else than what they want to see.
Heck, sometimes even just changing the user-agent header makes the problem
go away. :-(

How do you feel about Mozilla^wthose websites?


Personally I would love to see some more effort being put in putting the
encryption into seperate, generic DLL. It would allow people to upgrade
their security without having to change their front-end (the browser, mail
reader, etc. itself) too.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

I tried using version 56 which is supposed to work with Reminder Fox.
When I tried using it, FF automatically tried doing an upgrade even when I had autoupgrade turned off.

I had to disconnect my internet in order to change the autoupgrade option.

I do have a right to complain.

Andy

wrote:
On Saturday, February 23, 2019 at 3:11:04 AM UTC-6, R.Wieser wrote:
Andy,

How do you feel about Mozilla?

Better question: Why are you bitching about Mozilla when you can (still)
choose to install a version of their browser which still supports those
plugins you want to use ?

I would use Seamonkey which has no problem with addons,
but it will not work with yahoo mail or my banking sites.

How do you feel about Mozilla^wSeamonkey? :-)

And as Paul already mentioned, its mostly a problem created by the
companies websites, refusing to recognise anything else than what they
want to see. Heck, sometimes even just changing the user-agent header
makes the problem go away. :-(

How do you feel about Mozilla^wthose websites?


Personally I would love to see some more effort being put in putting the
encryption into seperate, generic DLL. It would allow people to upgrade
their security without having to change their front-end (the browser,
mail reader, etc. itself) too.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

I tried using version 56 which is supposed to work with Reminder Fox.
When I tried using it, FF automatically tried doing an upgrade even when
I had autoupgrade turned off.

I had to disconnect my internet in order to change the autoupgrade option.

I do have a right to complain.

Andy

I thought version FF 52.9 was the last one for Windows XP. But maybe my
memory is off.

wrote:


I tried using version 56 which is supposed to work with Reminder Fox.
When I tried using it, FF automatically tried doing an upgrade even when I had autoupgrade turned off.

I had to disconnect my internet in order to change the autoupgrade option.

I do have a right to complain.

Andy

You had autoupgrade turned off *after* the upgrade
to the browser was downloaded.

To stop it, you have to clear the download so the
program doesn't have access to it.

The autoupgrade setting stops the downloading process.
Any upgrade files already on the machine can still
be executed.

Yes, you have to be a ninja.

So the steps would be:

1) Download the desired release number from the repository.
Every imaginable version is in the tree.

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/fire...0/win64/en-US/

2) Disconnect network connection.

3) Install Firefox.

4) Disable autoupgrade.

5) Plug in network cable.

If you do the process out of order, you'll have to hunt
down where the upgrade file is being stored.

Paul

Andy,

I do have a right to complain.

Ofcourse you have. The question is, /why/ are you complaining ? You
have not payed for the product, and you are free to choose any other you
like better.

I tried using version 56 which is supposed to work with Reminder Fox.
When I tried using it, FF automatically tried doing an upgrade even when
I had autoupgrade turned off.

I had to disconnect my internet in order to change the autoupgrade option.

I don't get it: You had that autoupgrade turned off, but than you had to do
it again ? And having to "disconnect my internet" to be able to change it
? Whut ?

tl;dr:
Don't complain about stuff you cannot change. Try to find solutions or work
arounds for what bothers you - or find yourself another product ofcourse.

And do as Paul mentioned: Install FireFox with "the internet" disconnected
(1). That gives you, on first usage, the chance to change its settings
before it already acts on them. Better make notes of it too, so you can
use them the next time you (re)install a FireFox browser.

(1) might be a good idea for other, including non-mozilla, products too.

And yes, thats, among others, a nuissance that goes back quite a few
versions. :-(

Hint: You might find some already figured out "install scripts" online.
Saves you the bother of having to figure all the settings out and writing
one yourself.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Paul,

4) Disable autoupgrade.

I would extend that to "and apply all further setting changes in regard to
privacy, services and others".

I know that I do. Quite a list of them these days. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser