[ale] Alternative builds of Firefox besides Iceweasel?

[Jim Kinney]

If the whitelist worked, it would be great. But.....

On September 4, 2015 3:18:22 PM EDT, Chris Fowler <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com> wrote:
>I am not against the flag. I even appreciate it and I like I can
>inspect the cert. What I hate is that when I say ignore that site
>(white list) the browser tends to ignore me! 
>
>> From: "Jim Kinney" <jim.kinney at gmail.com>
>> To: "Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts - Yes! We run Linux!" <ale at ale.org>
>> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 1:44:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ale] Alternative builds of Firefox besides Iceweasel?
>
>> Sadly, some internal is never fixable. Remote consoles using java 1.4
>and ssl v1
>> embedded in hardware are a good example. It would be convenient to be
>able to
>> whitelist specific sites but clicking, yes, ok, run it anyway, i know
>its out
>> of date, 4-20 times per day pays off when I hit a public site flagged
>with ssl
>> v.2
>> On Sep 4, 2015 1:36 PM, "Lightner, Jeff" < JLightner at dsservices.com >
>wrote:
>
>>> Agreed but I’d at least like to know something IS an issue.
>
>>> There’s been more than one thing that Firefox has blocked which
>other browsers
>>> haven’t even made a peep about. I recently went to a Missouri state
>government
>>> site that Firefox blocked because of bad cypher but IE just let me
>attach to
>>> without comment. Chrome allowed it but did tell me about the bad
>cypher.
>
>>> My main reason for posting was to show a work around for the issue
>I’d seen on
>>> internal stuff when going via Firefox.
>
>>> If enough people would contact sites (as I did the Missouri one)
>Firefox
>>> wouldn’t be an issue any longer because sites might actually fix
>reported
>>> issues. The things Firefox is checking for allow known attack
>vectors. (Even
>>> for the internal stuff the appropriate action OUGHT to be fixing it
>but of
>>> course none of us has the cycles for that kind of effort.)
>
>>> For now Firefox will remain my default browser.
>
>>> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto: ale-bounces at ale.org ] On Behalf
>Of Chris
>>> Fowler
>>> Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 12:14 PM
>>> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
>>> Subject: Re: [ale] Alternative builds of Firefox besides Iceweasel?
>
>>> I have the same gripe as the OP. Internal webapps that use SSL, but
>do not need
>>> signed certificates can create problems. Even in Java. If you are
>using a
>>> specific version of Java for a specific app or device then FireFox
>and Chrome
>>> will prompt you forever.
>
>>> I know what I'm doing. If I say 192.168.1.4 is to be white-listed
>then I expect
>>> the browser to fall in line.
>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ale mailing list
>Ale at ale.org
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20150904/9982ffcb/attachment.html>