If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer
https://mywater.kcmo.org/cus/mcuslogin.jsp
Shows as having a certificate from an unknown issuer in Pale Moon on Windows 8.1. The Firefox users I've asked over on Mozilla's news server are here and there with their answers-mostly because I inadvertently gave them a partial URL instead of the full one to the login page, giving most of them blank screens. I corrected it in a later post but no one picked up on it again. Anyway, I'd appreciate any of you trying to hit the URL as I've given it here and letting me know if IE has any issues with its security. Trying to decide whether to bypass the error or not. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:06:15 -0500, none wrote:
https://mywater.kcmo.org/cus/mcuslogin.jsp Shows as having a certificate from an unknown issuer in Pale Moon on Windows 8.1. No error here in IE or Firefox. Here are the certificate details Screen-shot --- https://i.imgur.com/9jcx0mN.png Check Pale Moon's certificate store to see whether it has the right CA certificates. The Firefox users I've asked over on Mozilla's news server are here and there with their answers-mostly because I inadvertently gave them a partial URL instead of the full one to the login page, giving most of them blank screens. I corrected it in a later post but no one picked up on it again. Anyway, I'd appreciate any of you trying to hit the URL as I've given it here and letting me know if IE has any issues with its security. Trying to decide whether to bypass the error or not. -- Kind regards Ralph |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecurein Internet Explorer)
On 06/23/2018 15:47, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:06:15 -0500, none wrote: https://mywater.kcmo.org/cus/mcuslogin.jsp No error here in IE or Firefox. Check Pale Moon's certificate store to see whether it has the right CA certificates. As far as it goes you were right-it doesn't. I went and did some more homework. Pale Moon throws an error because the site doesn't send the intermediate certificate that it's supposed to, which leaves the certificate chain incomplete. You didn't see that in Internet Explorer because IE supports Authority Information Access fetching-it grabs the missing cert from the CA to complete the chain. Firefox and Pale Moon (which is forked from Firefox) don't support AIA (another childish spat between alternative browser and website developers that leaves end users in the lurch and drives more and more of them back to IE). Anyway, I was able to manually retrieve and install the cert by looking at the AIA URL on the certificate. Now I can pay my water bills online again. Thanks, Ralph for trying to help. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 16:38:24 -0500, none wrote:
that leaves end users in the lurch and drives more and more of them back to IE Users are going to Chrome, not to IE. Chrome has around 60% of the desktop browser market share. IE is under 10% and declining. Times have changed. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...901-201707.png -- Kind regards Ralph 🦊 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On 23 Jun 2018, Ralph Fox wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8: Users are going to Chrome, not to IE. Chrome has around 60% of the desktop browser market share. IE is under 10% and declining. Times have changed. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...901-201707.png I'm sorry to hear that. I quite dislike Chrome, though I use it on one of my computers because it seems to use slightly less resources than my first choice, Firefox. I find Chrome to be more annoying and less functional than most other browsers. Not to mention the Google privacy questions... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecurein Internet Explorer)
KenW wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 21:34:55 -0400, Nil wrote: On 23 Jun 2018, Ralph Fox wrote in alt.comp.os.windows-8: Users are going to Chrome, not to IE. Chrome has around 60% of the desktop browser market share. IE is under 10% and declining. Times have changed. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...901-201707.png I'm sorry to hear that. I quite dislike Chrome, though I use it on one of my computers because it seems to use slightly less resources than my first choice, Firefox. I find Chrome to be more annoying and less functional than most other browsers. Not to mention the Google privacy questions... If you are worried about privacy, stay off of the net PERIOD. Since switching from FF to Chrome, I haven't had a site not render correctly. KenW That's not the question though. If I visit Newegg and look for a product like say a SATA cable, then visit my favorite news site, should I be confronted with a 6" x 2" banner advert from Newegg, full of SATA cables ? Some of these banner adverts packed full of images of stuff, are sucking the life out of the browser, and you can barely scroll. The adverts got there by tracking. Tracking that's very difficult to get rid of. All it takes is your browser logging into Google and collecting info for "places.sqlite" or the like, to identify who you are, and bring back the Newegg adverts again. That's because just as many Google cookies are used to track you as Newegg cookies. It's one thing for Newegg to keep a cookie and show me SATA cables the next time I visit Newegg. It's another to turn my browser usage into a constant barrage of Newegg adverts. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On 23 Jun 2018, KenW
wrote in alt.comp.os.windows-8: If you are worried about privacy, stay off of the net PERIOD. Irrelevant and illogical. If you have no questions about internet privacy, you are sadly naive. And if you do have questions, please take your own advice immediately. Since switching from FF to Chrome, I haven't had a site not render correctly. Also irrelevant. Since using Firefox I haven't had a site not render correctly. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 21:34:55 -0400, Nil wrote:
On 23 Jun 2018, Ralph Fox wrote in alt.comp.os.windows-8: Users are going to Chrome, not to IE. Chrome has around 60% of the desktop browser market share. IE is under 10% and declining. Times have changed. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...901-201707.png I'm sorry to hear that. Google ran what has proven to be an effective campaign to push Chrome, on several fronts (including drive-by downloads). I quite dislike Chrome, though I use it on one of my computers because it seems to use slightly less resources than my first choice, Firefox. I used to use K-Meleon for this reason. Unfortunately the latest stable release is nearly 3 years old. http://kmeleonbrowser.org/ I find Chrome to be more annoying and less functional than most other browsers. I have heaps of bookmarks, and I much prefer Firefox for this. Not to mention the Google privacy questions... For this, look at one of the alternative Chromium builds such as SRWare Iron. http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php -- Kind regards Ralph 🗺ï¸ï¼·ðŸ•¸ï¸ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On 24 Jun 2018, Ralph Fox wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8: Google ran what has proven to be an effective campaign to push Chrome, on several fronts (including drive-by downloads). Almost every computer I've been asked to fix has Chrome on it, and the user can never tell me where it came from. I know that Avast Free AV and CCleaner, for two, try to sneak it past you during install. For this, look at one of the alternative Chromium builds such as SRWare Iron. http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php Thanks, I'll check it out. I have Chromium itself as an alternate browser on one computer, but it's been many moons since I actually ran it. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 00:03:19 -0400, Nil wrote:
On 23 Jun 2018, KenW wrote in alt.comp.os.windows-8: If you are worried about privacy, stay off of the net PERIOD. Irrelevant and illogical. If you have no questions about internet privacy, you are sadly naive. And if you do have questions, please take your own advice immediately. Since switching from FF to Chrome, I haven't had a site not render correctly. Also irrelevant. Since using Firefox I haven't had a site not render correctly. But how would you know? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
"Ralph Fox" wrote
| Google ran what has proven to be an effective campaign to push Chrome, | on several fronts (including drive-by downloads). | There was an article this week in NYT claiming that Firefox is making a comeback. Generally they were saying that Mozilla has made big improvements, especially with privacy, and put FF "back in the running". https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/t...r-privacy.html (Requires cookies) Though the article is by Brian Chen. It's been my experience that he and his AppleSeed sidekick, Farhad Manjoo, are not in the business of writing intelligent analysis of tech trends. Their articles tend to read as loosely editied press releases. I suspect that's probably what they are. And Firefox hardly has a good privacy record. It's good for privacy *only* for people who are intimately familiar with the settings, prefs, and extensions. The one advantage Mozilla has over Google is that they're still, at least in theory, a non-profit and seem to have a number of employees who consider decency to be a mission. | Not to mention the Google privacy | questions... | | For this, look at one of the alternative Chromium builds such as | SRWare Iron. | http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php | Caveat emptor. I downloaded Iron recently because I wanted to check my webpages in a variety of recent browsers. So I got Midori in lieu of Safari and Iron in lieu of Chrome. Iron tried to call home immediately without asking, to start-iron.com. When I blocked that it tried to call Google. That's exactly what they claim it doesn't do. I wasn't even doing a search or loading a webpage. I never let it through the firewall to begin with. I was only loading my local webpages to check the rendering. It just started trying to call out. Many people don't mind the trick of calling home at first start, but there is a principle the Software that does it is not respecting privacy/property. But even if you don't mind that, for Iron to try to call Google without asking makes their whole presentation a lie. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On 24 Jun 2018, mechanic wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8: On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 00:03:19 -0400, Nil wrote: Also irrelevant. Since using Firefox I haven't had a site not render correctly. But how would you know? By comparing the site with other browsers. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows asinsecure in Internet Explorer)
On 24/06/2018 02:55, Paul wrote:
That's not the question though. If I visit Newegg and look for a product like say a SATA cable, then visit my favorite news site, should I be confronted with a 6" x 2" banner advert from Newegg, full of SATA cables ? Some of these banner adverts packed full of images of stuff, are sucking the life out of the browser, and you can barely scroll. The adverts got there by tracking. Tracking that's very difficult to get rid of. All it takes is your browser logging into Google and collecting info for "places.sqlite" or the like, to identify who you are, and bring back the Newegg adverts again. That's because just as many Google cookies are used to track you as Newegg cookies. It's one thing for Newegg to keep a cookie and show me SATA cables the next time I visit Newegg. It's another to turn my browser usage into a constant barrage of Newegg adverts. Â*Â* Paul Turn off third party cookies and set the do-not-track flag? -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows as insecure in Internet Explorer)
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 17:03:05 +0100, Brian Gregory wrote:
On 24/06/2018 02:55, Paul wrote: That's not the question though. If I visit Newegg and look for a product like say a SATA cable, then visit my favorite news site, should I be confronted with a 6" x 2" banner advert from Newegg, full of SATA cables ? Some of these banner adverts packed full of images of stuff, are sucking the life out of the browser, and you can barely scroll. The adverts got there by tracking. Tracking that's very difficult to get rid of. All it takes is your browser logging into Google and collecting info for "places.sqlite" or the like, to identify who you are, and bring back the Newegg adverts again. That's because just as many Google cookies are used to track you as Newegg cookies. It's one thing for Newegg to keep a cookie and show me SATA cables the next time I visit Newegg. It's another to turn my browser usage into a constant barrage of Newegg adverts. Â*Â* Paul Turn off third party cookies and set the do-not-track flag? I do not turn off third party cookies any more. Instead, * I configure my browser to only keep cookies until I close it * After logging out of Google, I close and restart my browser to clear cookies. * I use a master password so my browser cannot log into Google by itself. I found that some sites could not work without third-party cookies. For example, I could not top up my mobile phone. The phone company outsourced payments processing to a third party who does it securely. The third party used cookies to track through the steps of topping up. With third party cookies turned off, I kept going around in circles on the top-up page. The do-not-track flag is like putting a sign outside your home saying "do not burgle" -- a sign which real burglars will ignore. Set the do-not-track flag if it makes you feel good, but do not expect much. -- Kind regards Ralph |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Got it sorted (Was: Need to know if this site shows asinsecure in Internet Explorer)
On 13/07/2018 23:14, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 17:03:05 +0100, Brian Gregory wrote: On 24/06/2018 02:55, Paul wrote: That's not the question though. If I visit Newegg and look for a product like say a SATA cable, then visit my favorite news site, should I be confronted with a 6" x 2" banner advert from Newegg, full of SATA cables ? Some of these banner adverts packed full of images of stuff, are sucking the life out of the browser, and you can barely scroll. The adverts got there by tracking. Tracking that's very difficult to get rid of. All it takes is your browser logging into Google and collecting info for "places.sqlite" or the like, to identify who you are, and bring back the Newegg adverts again. That's because just as many Google cookies are used to track you as Newegg cookies. It's one thing for Newegg to keep a cookie and show me SATA cables the next time I visit Newegg. It's another to turn my browser usage into a constant barrage of Newegg adverts. Â*Â* Paul Turn off third party cookies and set the do-not-track flag? I do not turn off third party cookies any more. Instead, * I configure my browser to only keep cookies until I close it * After logging out of Google, I close and restart my browser to clear cookies. * I use a master password so my browser cannot log into Google by itself. I found that some sites could not work without third-party cookies. For example, I could not top up my mobile phone. The phone company outsourced payments processing to a third party who does it securely. The third party used cookies to track through the steps of topping up. With third party cookies turned off, I kept going around in circles on the top-up page. Then you enter the mobile phone site as an exception to the no third party cookies rule. The do-not-track flag is like putting a sign outside your home saying "do not burgle" -- a sign which real burglars will ignore. Set the do-not-track flag if it makes you feel good, but do not expect much. Well yes, but presumably a few people are obeying it. -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|