Slashdot Mirror
UK Government Locks Out Non-MS Browsers
Joel Rowbottom writes: "The UK government's new gateway.gov.uk site, which is being trumpeted in advance of the forthcoming General Election, has been revealed to only work on Microsoft browsers under Windows - meaning you must use IE5.01 or above to be able to access government content, or do your tax returns online: no MacOS, no Netscape, and certainly no Linux. Who can have developed this site for the government? It's Microsoft of course, on their .NET platform! There's a Register article about it, but for a more extensive look LinuxUser magazine in the UK have written a article on it which is available as PDF here."
It's the official government site. It's paid for with taxpayers' money. Linux users pay taxes too. Do the people who "just don't use the site" get a tax refund?
We also don't bother ourselves with trivialities such as Nike shoes and Tommy shirts. We wear proper attire: tight fitting vests over pressed white dress shirts and polished leather shoes, brown of course. Step into a knee length pair of knickers and the day can begin!
Following a little research of my own:
Says it all to me...
I don't understand why mozilla doesn't have such a feature.
There is a bug filed for that functionality. Feel free to vote for it as well (of course, you need a free Bugzilla account to vote).
Alex Bischoff
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
According to Register sources, there's a sorry tale behind all of this. About a year ago the Blair government was determined to embark on a love affair with Bill and his merry men, and it began to be made clear to the techies (many of them Linux lovers) on government staff that further mention of the L-word would likely be career-threatening. Many of the sites produced prior to the great Government Gateway project were indeed Linux-based, but this would cease.
Microsoft may not be very responsive to public opinion, but the British Government sure is.
Heh.. the Blair government's share of the vote in the last election was almost as high as Microsoft's share of the desktop OS market. They could piss of 10 million Slashbots and still win the next election.
They probably don't want to try to explain to the average user how to update their browser to recognize their CA.
My tests with Mac OS 9.1 on my PowerBook G4...
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; iCab 2.5.1; Macintosh; I; PPC) and javascript off: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 95) and javascript off: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) and javascript off: Failed
MS IE 5 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)) javascript off: Failed
Netscape 4.7 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC)) javascript off: Failed
MS IE 5 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)) javascript on: Worked!
Netscape 4.7 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC)) javascript on: Worked!
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; iCab 2.5.1; Macintosh; I; PPC) and javascript on: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 95) and javascript on: Worked!
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) and javascript on: Failed (strange...)
Opera for Mac v5.0 tp3.298, set to "Identify as MSIE 5.0", which gives a browser id of: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC) Opera 5.0 [en]: Failed (beta version, probably does not support javascript...)
--
"Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
JavaScript needs to be supported, and turned on as well. I found this out with iCab on the mac, which must be set to say it is IE5 for Windows, and have JavaScript on for it to work. The mac version of Opera not only does not support JavaScript, it does not have iCab's flexability in terms of what you want it to have for the browser id. In iCab, you can set it to anything arbitrary string of characters. In Opera, you can choose "Identify as MSIE 5.0", and it will use the following string: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC) Opera 5.0 [en].
--
"Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
We covered this back in Febuary: Jason Kitcat applied under the Freedom of Information Act for more details. The government's e-envoy has also funded a research project into providing Free Software support for their PKI. If you've got some expertise, I'm sure the project leaders would appreciate your assistance.
I don't actually think that the IE exclusion is the most damaging part of this story. The tacit support by the government for a handful of commercial authentication services (at least one of which, Chambersign, appears to involve private key escrow) looks to be more pernicious.
d.
Kitcat's FOIA report
Original report
Follow-up, including mention of the Open Source project, with details of how you can help.
Jeez. Read the damn article. The Register pointed out most of the things that people are comlaining about in the /. story. But since nobody bothers to read the Reg article, everyone seems to assume that THEY were the ones that left all the important info out.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Depends on what sorts of bells and whistles they are gonna build into the site. Microsoft should certainly be able to throw a ton of manpower at a high-visibility project like this though. 3 weeks should be more than enough to put together a pretty good site.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Nobody seems to have noted (at least not in the modded-up posts) that this is largely a matter of the server checking browser strings.
Netscape 4.7 works on Mac and Windows, and since all versions of Netscape 4.7 on all platforms can do all the PKI/crypto stuff, there shouldn't be any technical reason why Netscape won't work under Linux/NetBSD/Solaris/AIX/whatever.
If I knew a URL beyond the browser-checking first page, I'd be surprised if I couldn't go on to use the site perfectly happily. It's a shame the authors of this site couldn't be a little more intelligent with their checking.
--
There is a hidden pref in mozilla (I don't since when) called useragent.
...")
Just edit your preferences and set:
user_pref("browser.useragent", "MSIE
Hugs, Cyke
First of all the website is WWW.gateway.gov.uk. If you try to go to gateway.gov.uk you will not get any content.
But other than that, it seems like a number of wild complaints with no coesion to the story.
Something about the PKI technology used. Well if other browsers don't support this, uhh what can be done about it?
PKI is here to stay, and it would be wise for other browser makers to come up with support for this would it not?
Ohwell the Register is the National Enquirer of the IT world for a reason, I guess.
Yeah, but remember that Microsoft started this trend by saying they're a bogus "compatible" version of Netscape... (I think MS still says their browser is "Mozilla/x.xx (compatible...)")
I just wish people would use real user agent information and not try using really silly stuff like some people seem to do ("Lynx on ENIAC" and "Commodore 64 with 32 megs of RAM" seem to be popular - as a side note, I would like to get a SuperCPU and RAM expansion for my C64 so I could browse web better on that... =)
(...or, at least, if they're using silly bogus User-Agents, they should at least be creative. That "Bond/007 (James Bond; 007; UK; Licence To Kill)" was pretty cool =)
...or use things like Junkbuster to mess with the User-Agent header.
I don't like this behavior, personally, because this skewers statistics. Now, webmasters think 90% of web users use MSIE, so they start "optimizing" their pages for MSIE.
But do all people really use MSIE? I think not. Especially when many "small" browsers lie that they're MSIE...
"nn percent of web surfers use MSIE. The rest lie they do." =)
Unless by "This is WASHINGTON" you mean the USA?
You claim they stole code from someone (unnamed), changed the citation of authorship, and then gave it away (presumably under the GPL). Do you have any published references for this, AC? A link, please... --M
Why not? If it's legal, convenient and you are aware of the stance on important issues each candidate has then there is nothing wrong with it per se.
The biggest problem with IE dominance is this:
If the day ever comes that [someone like] MS controls [almost] 100% of the browser market, that puts them effectively also in control of the web server market, the content authoring market, the browser plugin market, etc.
No offense, but this didn't strike me as all that "(Score:5, Insightful)". Not that you're wrong or anything -- actually, I'd say it's dead on target, as far as it goes. It's just that you didn't really shed any new light on the issue with respect to what we've all been discussing for years now. As in, pretty much everyone knew, back when the "Browser Wars" were first starting, that this was what made the issue so strategically important. Or at least the geeks knew, which is what made it so frustrating trying to answer less-technical users who asked, "So what makes Netscape so much better, that I should muck around trying to replace [the pre-installed] IE [on my new Win95 box]?"
By the way, there is something that I think is an important piece of the "control of the browser gives control of the server" argument, which I don't see stated very often, though maybe it's just because people consider it obvious and don't bother saying it explicitly. Anyway:
The core of it is, to summarize what you said, They decide to implement [some new feature] in their browsers that only accept data from [their] servers, effectively putting [other] server authors out of business. Here's what I'd like to add: the key is that they wouldn't do it all at once. People sometimes respond that, even if you control one side or the other, the existence of diversity on the other side would prevent acceptance of your proprietary extensions -- your failure to play well on the other side might even endanger your dominance on the first side.
However, this misses the possibility that you might phase in the proprietary extensions on both sides while also maintaining standards-compliance, meaning that your products on both sides would become not just as good, but actually the best, since they would be the only ones to support both the standard and proprietary features. Only later, once you become dominant on both sides, would you gradually begin to "accidentally" break the standards-compliance on one, the other, or both sides (not necessarily with anything so blatant as real incompatibility; a performance or stability hit would serve just as well) -- it wouldn't hurt anyone, you see, because by then providers could cheerfully switch their servers over to using the proprietary features, confident that everyone (well, almost -- everyone that matters, anyway) would be using the supported browser as well.
David Gould
David Gould
main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
Unsupported Browser
You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out which browsers are supported and which settings to use.
Supported Browsers
We have made the Government Gateway compatible with as many browsers as possible, on both PCs and Macintoshes. However, because we need to maintain maximum security on this web site, we cannot support older versions of browsers. To use the Government Gateway, you must have:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later
OR an Apple Macintosh with Mac OS version 7.5 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 5.0 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.xx or later
a working Internet connection
the 128-bit security add-in, for your version of the browser
Please note that you cannot currently use Netscape 6 to access the Government Gateway, due to issues with the support for digital certificates in this new version.
You can find out which version of the browser version you are currently using, by clicking on Help, then About..., in the menu bar of your browser. The name and version number of your browser is displayed.
Browser Settings
To use the Government Gateway, you must also have the following options enabled in your browser:
Your browser must be set to accept cookies
Java must be enabled
Javascript must be enabled
To check your settings:
Internet Explorer
1. From the menu bar, click on Tools, then Internet Options.
2. In the window that appears, click on the Security tab. Click on the Internet zone and check that the security level is set to Medium
Netscape Navigator
1. From the menu bar, click on Edit, then Preferences.
2. In the window that appears, click on Advanced in the left-hand pane. The settings are displayed.
The interesting thing is that the error message is passed back as
http://www.gateway.gov.uk
This isn't inside a hidden frame because in general iCab gives you all sorts of neat tools to see those icky little in line frames.
But loading the site with IE5.1.1 tech preview for Mac OS X does give in the code:
NOSCRIPT
META HTTP-EQUIV=REFRESH CONTENT="0; URL=/html/bad_browser.asp"
You are using an unsupported browser. For further information, please click a href="/html/bad_browser.asp"here/a.
/NOSCRIPT
*of course cleaned up without html brackets for slashdot*
So I'm assuming some erstwhile interested party might go find out what actually is programmed in to bad_browser.asp to find the truth about what the detection method really is....
The page states that a MAC is fine also you just need to have MSIE, but I think it is more an encryption thing than anything else. This is another Half Baked /. story
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
simple, don't use front page..it is crap anyway...
try homesite or dreamweaver
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
and since we are NEVER gonna get a M$IE for LINUX (pause to wait for laughter and choking to stop)
I would have to agree with Stevo. It is well with M$'s PAST behavior to attempt to 'lock' out a competitor. The question is can 'we' make a Linux browser that meets the encryption standards that are required ? If that can be done and IT still is refused then there is a possible sherman act violation.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
...that most of the other denizens of Slashdot suffer under. Namely, that slashdot is a news organization. Really, slashdot is just a clearinghouse for various news and pseudo-news organizations. They just say, "This is what foo has to say about bar. Discuss." They don't attempt to report or fact-check. They're not a news gathering organization.
Slashdot used to be a place where a sufficiently egregious screwup in a story would result in a prompt update and mea culpa from the responsible editor.
This no longer seems to be the case.
I have my sortings set to "highest rated first" because a red herring story will usually have a prompt comment correcting the issue and getting moderated up to 5. When discussion closes on a story, however, it gets served as static HTML, and unsorted, and such comments no longer show up at the top. This is why updates are necessary, but /.'s
editors are getting increasingly lax about
getting these done, some editors more than
others (coughMichaelcough).
This needs to change. Editors, please, start updating your stories, even when it means wearing a paper bag for a few days. If you don't, the "new journalism" will no longer have any advantage over the old.
.... works with Netscape version 4.08+. What do I need before I can register?
I have just tried the "Fax your MP" link, and it says that the service is suspended because the upcoming election.
Earlier this evening my (ex-)MP knocked on my door, campaigning for re-election. If I had seen this article earlier, I would have raised the point with him in person.
Was Young's comment, not about predatory monolopolies, but instead:
"...our governmental infrastructures should be permanently open to competitive bid..."
Yes, Microsoft is the standard, and I'll even give (Linux zealot that I am) that IE is a better browser than Netscape4.x/6, and there's some good tools there on IIS (wealth of MCSE's, etc).
BUT, the truth in that statement - there should be a bid - is beyond petty squabbles about the better OS. If MS really does present the better solution, it should be given the chance to prove it, rather than being implemented because its the "default".
It makes me mad as a Linux advocate. I'd like to "lose" fair and square. If I can't write a good response to an RFP, if I can't get the people and the code running, then I deserve to lose. But I doubt anyone really put any thought into it. We need [foo], let's put it on IIS. Call MS and get a nice site license.
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
I just browsed around the site, in and out of the secure registration parts, and the tax part with no problem. And I was using Netscape 4.77 128bit security version. More FUD I suppose.
Perhaps they should change the name from "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" to "Microsoft Country "...
"Unsupported Browser
You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out which browsers are supported and which settings to use."
Just because it lets in Slashdot-favourite Mozilla doesn't mean everything is nice and dandy: Opera had 128-bit encryption (for European purposes) before Netscape and Microsoft got through the export restriction wall.
Go write one then. :> Problem is, anyone who uses Linux is more than likely familiar with programming and/or HTML. I know myself that I prefer to write my own HTML and PHP and not have some god-awful program cock it up by what it THINKS I want in the page.
.. therefore there's no 'market' and no simple HTML editors.
The real problem is 'average' users don't use Linux
--
Delphis
Delphis
Slashdot did *not* get it wrong.
You cannot access that site from a non-microsoft operating system. Period.
Even faking the user agents doesn't work as they seem to have some extra checking to make sure you don't do that.
This has nothing to do with the capablilties of browsers and everything to do with a monopoly trying to force people to use their products. I hear that the makers of Opera are considering legal action - the actions of the government are a breach of european law (product tying, for one.. possibly others).
From the Register article:
Translation: The country is being run by a PHB.
So what exactly doesn't work when trying to go to this site? It's working just great on OmniPage 4 on MacOS X. It seems like if you read the damn page it tells you what you need in order to use the fucking page. You need a relatively modern browser with support for 128bit SSL and the ability to use cookies. Goddamn jackasses got their panties in a tiff because they're illiterate fuckos. The part that doesn't work with some browsers is if you want to use ChamberSign or Equifax certificates to log onto the website. Anyone with a working browser can register and enter their name and PIN to log on. God damn it how did this get posted unmodified? Did nobody go and check if this was even true? At least one guy did (I don't remember the CID) and he even found spoofing iCab to report itself as IE got the site to work just fine. I bet 99% of the posts didn't even try going to the site.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Slashdot did *not* get it wrong.
Slashdot headline: "UK Government Locks out Non-MS browsers.
Reality: People can access the site using Netscape.
Verdict: Slashdot got it wrong.
You cannot access that site from a non-microsoft operating system. Period.
Reality: MacOS and MacOSX users can access the site. Now, timely $150 million donations aside, MacOS/X is not a Microsoft operating system. :) Period.
Verdict: Tony Holyle got it wrong, too.
Cheers,
Whenever I go to the site that lets me look at my Mastercard transactions, I have a similar problem: it says it doesn't support my browser. I don't want anyone to support my browser dammit, I want them to conform to standards!
It kinda pisses me off, because I know that it is utterly trivial to create a site that works with every browser. But noooo.... they decide to go to extra trouble to exclude everyone else.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Since we're referring to a Reg article on this, here is another dealing with the reactions of Opera Software
Basically, they are going to take issue with this, directly with Andrew Pinder, the UK "e-envoy."
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Quoting from the page:
However, because we need to maintain maximum security on this web site, [...]
And a few lines down they write this:
Your browser must be set to accept cookies
Java must be enabled
Javascript must be enabled
Java no less! So they want a secure, yet public website, but in the mean time don't care zit if your system is compromised/slow/crashing because your Java and Javascript are turned on. Sheez...
"Fix it? It has been disintegrated, by definition it cannot be fixed!" - Gru in Despicable Me.
As you said it does work, until you turn off JavaScript. I wish sites wouldn't require the use of JavaScript, there are better ways to test for certificate compatibility, namely trying to issue one and then letting the browser decide whether it supports it or not. I tend to surf with JavaScript turned off as it increases the stability of most web browsers ten-fold.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Jeez! Almost read that as "Blair uses Dope" and sent the link off to Matt Drudge :)
The article did say that some features will be available to non MS users.
The same thing happened in Poland. Apple Europe filed suit. I don't know what the outcome was.
photosMy Photostream
Let's face it. This "new technology" is another Microsoft standard meant to extend it's monopoly into yet another platform. Usually, when people "innovate" new standards, they appear on RFC's and people contribute ideas and eventually the bad ones get debunked. Not only is .NET an internal M$ thing - everybody knows all the world's smartest people work at M$, so they can never be wrong - but you can be DAMN sure that M$ will make absolutely certain only IE ever fully supports it. It's not that M$ doesn't ever have good ideas, it's that they make sure noone else can participate.
Open the source, baby!
If it takes you four frickin' hours to recompile your kernel you probably shouldn't bother playing games on that box in any case..
-Splat
It doesn't fix the supposed problem to require opera in addition to IE...wake up!
What's happening on the web now is to be expected when it's unchecked corporate greed that is fueling the development of new web features...
Slashdot 's editors are dickheads
"in order to meet the British government's target date... Dell and Microsoft worked feverishly to meet a blistering three-week rollout schedule for the first phase."
If they got the first draft to work in three weeks, they're doing a lot better than anybody I've ever worked with. Our stuff doesn't work with ANY browser that fast.
What's your damage, Heather?
This brings new meanings to the term "Microsoft Tax".
This project is an interesting showcase of what .NET is capable of. I'm sure there are developers who are noticing these developments and what it means for their future projects.
Sorta works with (some) microsoft-only components.
Sorry Billy boy, that's not good enough.
Just as a case-in-point...
I'm running Mozilla 0.9 w/PSM on Win2k and it allowed me to enter the registration process without a problem. Seems like this whole article is a bit over-blown.
-brain
Aren't you reading it all? It's the PKI infrastructre that Netscape 5 doesn't do.
OK lets take a look at quotes from theregister article "we checked it with Netscape 6 on Windows, and got in without trouble". And it's not the web site, it's the digital certificates that cause problems "Please note that if you wish to enrol for services that require a digital certificate, you may not be able to use the full range of browsers listed above. For example, Equifax certificates can currently only be used with Internet Explorer 5.01 or later (they do not work on any version of the Netscape browser); ChamberSign certificates can be used with both Nestcape Navigator and Internet Explorer, except they are not currently supported on version 6 of the Netscape browser. Please check your certificate provider's web site for more information about which browsers they support." As for saying you can't do your tax return on-line in Netscape? Bollocks. It uses straight HTTPS. I've just completed mine. Did any of you think to check for yourselves? I doubt it, you just saw "it was written by Microsoft" and your knees starting jerking.
The old slashdot story talking about them using linux and solaris as their server farm. Wonder if some of those workers had any say on what they used...
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
... you set the user-agent to something a bit more mainstream. I tried entering the site normally, and was rejected as using a bad browser. I change the user-agent to MSIE 5.5 / Windows NT, and it works just fine.
Does this not demonstrate that the site is rejecting browsers based only on their user-agent string, not on their actual capabilities?
- SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
But will I be able to prove that none of it really me, when the time comes?
funny how M$ will claim other browsers improperly implement SSL and certificates, given that they're Netscape inventions. this is a pretty clearcut instance of "nono, all your standards are belong to us, pay no attention to who made them..."
huh ? apache + ssl + certs takes around a day to set up on linux last time i tried. maybe its your software but for the most part its fairly trivial to get cert authentication working with apache+mod_ssl on ALL browsers.
"When you vote someone in, it is majority rules. When you hold a referendum, majority rules..."
When you hold a lynching majority rules too. 10 while people for killing this nigger and one nigger against too bad for the nigger huh?
Fortunately for us modern republics have recognized such a thing as tyranny of the majority. We uphold the rights of everybody and recognize that the govt is here to serve all of it's citizens.
"If you ask me those other browsers should be more up to standards"
I would have no complaints if the system was written to standards. But it's not. If they just stuck to the W3C standards of HTML and CSS nobody would be complaining about anything. Here MS deliberately wrote the app to reject operating systems and browsers they didn't like. Lots of people demonstrated that by changing the user agent on their browser they were able to use the site. It's not that the browsers were not capable of displaying the page it's that the browsers were rejected by the site because the writers of the site did not like their operating system and name. This is discrimination plain and simple. I think it's outregaous that govt web sites don't comply with W3C standards and force people to pay for software they may not want just to participate in the process of governing themselves.
War is necrophilia.
"Most people use IE anyway (let's face it...there aren't too many options)"
Most people in the UK are also white. Maybe the the govt should prevent the east indians from some things too. Maybe it should prevent them using convenient services and instead make them wait in lines instead. Sorry only white people can use this web site the rest of you can haul your assess off to the courthouse.
The Govt is there to serve everybody not just the majority. The rest of the people are citizens too arent they? Why didn't they insist on using cross platform browsers on the contract?
War is necrophilia.
Well, it's certainly not Lynx compliant....
if(!toilet_paper) roll.replace(new roll);
"You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out which browsers are supported and which settings to use."
Fuckers.
Become a FSF associate member before the low #s are used
Doesnt work under Linux though.
Now that its a requirement to be a client of Microsoft to be able to access information from the government - does this mean that MS client licenses will be tax deductible ? It should - considering your rights as a citizen appears to be hinging on if you are a customer of MS.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Any story that contains a link to The Register should be placed in the this-probably-isnt-true department and we should be able to deselect them in our options.
How we know is more important than what we know.
This development is particularly frustrating, since up to now UK .gov sites have generally been very standards compliant. In fact the open.gov.uk initiative even has a W3C standards statement. I quote:
"The most important aspect of publishing information on the internet is to ensure that it is available to all, not just a select few who happen to have the newest browser, all the latest plugins and a top of the range, superfast PC.
UK public sector information must be accessible, legible and fast to download."
And indeed, the vast majority ofhttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=01/05/25/18162 30&cid=117
I often use Netscape 4.7 on Windows. Not to be elitist, but in a mostly-vain effort to curb IE dominance. I use Mozilla at home. Anyway.. read above for my thoughts on IE dominance. This is a prime example of why it's bad. It's not necessarily the browser, but the certs and the OS in this case, but it's pretty much the same situation.
Er, except that I do, and it dosen't.
Fine. It still dosen't work with Linux. I tried it using Mozilla 0.9 and Netscape 4.77 (the SAME BROWSER they say you need), and it came back with a message that I was "using an old version of a browser", or that my browser "does not have the correct settings".
There's no reason whatsoever to support Netscape on Windows and not on Linux.
According to the linked page, it dosen't work at all using Netscape 4.77 and Linux. It comes back and says my browser is "old" or "does not have the correct settings". I get the same using mozilla 0.9.
Well, i got in with mozila 0.9 (albeit running under w98) when i enabled javascript and cookies. So i guess (if the story is not totally bogus) that someone reacted very fast and disabled that IE-Hurdle at the entrance (that's a cheap one). I even got into the secure site (https://secure. ...) and for people who couldn't use the certificate to log in there seemed to be a possibility to get a userid and password via mail. I also got to the inlandrevenue-site from there.
Maybe some other people should check their "browsing experience" there. The page explaining that i had to use netscape or ie 4+ only popped up once, when i had disabled Javascript.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
---
Bullshit. IE 5 may be superior in many ways, but it's damn sure not superior in *every* way. Leading the list of ways that it's NOT superior:
stability. IE 5.5 still crashes more often than Netscape 4.72 on Windows, and much, much, more often than Konq, Mozilla or Netscape on Linux.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
So what? I don't see what all the bickering is about... Security for the site requires the latest in digital certificates which no other browser yet supports, and that is somehow Microsoft's fault?
"Geez man that MiCr0$oFt is so shit, what kind of fool would favour security over compatability when youre talking billions of dollars changing hands via a website?"
And dont get me started on nutscrape and their poor excuse for a browser. If they hadn't ripped off Mozilla they'd still be a useless piece of shit. Now they're getting somewhere close to W3C compliant, but don't expect them to be on top of digital certificates and other recent standards.
Cut your petty speculation
"this was probably due more to ignorance rather than design on the part of the commissioning body"
As far as I know Microsoft tried long and hard to implement support for Netscape but its total lack of implementation of the required digital certificate standards made that more or less impossible. In fact I believe they collected much information regarding this, to demonstrate to the government that this wasn't a "lets ban everythign but our browsers because we're a monopoly" thing.
I don't know if Timothy is on crack or what, because that site works fine for me under Netscape 4 on MacOS.
Yesterday I read the article from home, and was pissed off, but couldn't test it because all I have at home is IE 5 on Windows. Today at work I thought I'd try it from one of our Mac's, and it worked fine.
Unix is mysterious, and ancient, and strong. It's made of cast iron and the bones of heroic programmers of old -
This is so cool. Linux users don't have to pay taxes!
A friend of mine was involved in a PIM/WAP/WEB site in Zope for the PM and his staff a couple of month back, so they are actually using OpenSource on a day to day basis.
Let's leave Microsoft alone to do as it pleases for two years. Then let's complain. OK?
I wonder what we'll be complaining about then...
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
A) Windows 3.1 is not supported according to the post at the root of this thread.
B) Microsoft Download site returns no entries for IE5 and Windows 3.1. ('Course it wouldn't return a single IE for Windows 3.1 despite 4.0 supporting it.)
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
"But why the rush? Again, it's ever-helpful Dell that tells us that although work on the project had started last June, "the original vendor withdrew from the project four months later." Coyness does set in now, but The Register is able to tell you that the original vendor was Compaq. The precise kit, reason for 'withdrawal' and projected OS we don't know, but somebody'll tell us, and the timing does seem to match the banning of Linux and the onset of the Redmond love affair. "
A recent turnaround for no real reason, and the vendor is hurrying to get away with the money before maintenance costs sink in.
--
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
I got IE running on my solaris sparc (I felt dirty doing it) but I can access "IE Only Sites" as needed - so how is the article claiming it's an only IE only windows kinda situation?
Wheeeee
I have been in correspondance about this with both the Inland Revenue, my MP and the Cabinet Office. (gov. dept. responsible for gov. IT, amongst other things).
The gist of it is that the whole digital certificates thing will be extended to none M$ browsers at some (unspecified) point in the future. You cannot currently get into *ANY* part of the site with a non-M$ browser.
My opinion is that this site is very important for a whole load of reasons, and it is important that it must work properly (we are not talking a $10 paperback from Amazon here, we are talking about personal and business taxes, amongst other things). Since they have taken the arguably short sighted step of using an M$ server solution, the fact that the first browser to be "certified" is Explorer is not surprising. This is of course a bit stupid - half the point of the public-key infrastructure is to make it all work without having to check every browser with every server.
U.K. slashdotters: please pester your MP about this, and suggest they pass on your comments to Ian McCartney, Minister of State at the Cabinet Office. You can do this here.
"What I look forward to is continued immaturity followed by death."
This may however have been an early design feature that has now been edited out; we checked it with Netscape 6 on Windows, and got in without trouble. But we've also heard from people who couldn't get in with 6, and earlier versions of Netscape, Opera (even 5.11 pretending to be IE) don't work. We've got one Mac user saying he got in with IE 5 - we don't know how either.
It's not a big, public launch, and like any launch of a web-based product, you're going to see browser incompatibilities. If my company could get back every dime spent on dealing with the differences between IE and Netscape, we'd be in a hell of a lot better market position.
If MS somehow tries to maintain that it will always require Windows/IE, then you've got a problem. But this, this is nothing yet.
All it really does is make the User-Agent header useless. Maybe we'll soon see a new HTTP header, Real-User-Agent :)
Jason
So I wanted to look at the certificate in question...
/O=VeriSign Trust Network/OU=VeriSign, Inc./OU=VeriSign International Server CA - Class 3/OU=www.verisign.com/CPS Incorp.by Ref. LIABILITY LTD.(c)97 VeriSign
/C=US/O=VeriSign, Inc./OU=Class 3 Public Primary Certification Authority
/C=US/O=VeriSign, Inc./OU=Class 3 Public Primary Certification Authority
I fired up my MS Internet Explorer 5.50.4522.1800 with all the latest patches from Microsoft and went to the site. The little lock at the bottom of my IE window was happy. I opened up the certificate and there was a warning certificate icon and a message: "This certificate has failed to verify for all of its intended purposes."
First of all, this has got to be a bug in IE 5.5 one way or the other: it shouldn't have a "good lock" if it doesn't think that it is good!
If this is the problem (rather than just the dialog being busted), the certificate should be broken everywhere and it just slipped through testing because they thought that if it worked for MSIE, it must be OK.
Let's wip out the latest version of openssl and see what it tells me...
The certificate they are using has a chained CA. Here's the details from (bottom to base CA):
subject=/C=GB/ST=London/L=Westminster/O=The Cabinet Office/OU=Government Gateway/OU=Terms of use at www.trustwise.com/rpa (c) 00/OU=Authenticated by British Telecommunications plc/OU=Member, VeriSign Trust Network/CN=secure.gateway.gov.uk
issuer=
subject=/O=VeriSign Trust Network/OU=VeriSign, Inc./OU=VeriSign International Server CA - Class 3/OU=www.verisign.com/CPS Incorp.by Ref. LIABILITY LTD.(c)97 VeriSign
issuer=
subject=/C=US/O=VeriSign, Inc./OU=Class 3 Public Primary Certification Authority
issuer=
The middle certificate also has the same error according to IE 5.5 -- the base certificate is valid.
And now to verify it with openssl:
secure.gateway.gov.uk.p7b.b64: unable to load certificate file
9917:error:0D0A2007:asn1 encoding routines:d2i_X509_CINF:expecting an asn1 sequence:x_cinf.c:106:address=135048348 offset=0
9917:error:0D09F004:asn1 encoding routines:d2i_X509:nested asn1 error:x_x509.c:103:address=135048344 offset=4
9917:error:0906700D:PEM routines:PEM_ASN1_read_bio:ASN1 lib:pem_lib.c:290:
OK, it failed. Let's see why...
Looking at the values inside of it (actually with MSIE), I see these unknown Enhanced Key Usage:
Unknown Key Usage(2.16.840.1.113730.4.1)
Unknown Key Usage(1.3.6.1.4.1.311.10.3.3)
And there weren't any other known values mentioned. Since I don't have a MIB that decodes these ASN1 values, I have no idea if they are correct or not. (If you can decode these values, please post them -- I'd love to know what new values have been created. Thanks.)
I wonder if the pre-release beta of MSIE 6.0 also has a "gook lock" and fails to verify when you bring up the dialog as well... (Post a response if you know.)
BTW, the base certificate (which must have been installed with MSIE) is valid for 4 "Enhanced Key Usage (Property)" values that IE 5.5 was able to decode without any problem.
Kurt
If I go to the site, I see a page which does not have any links, but says unsupported browser. I am using Linux and Mozilla( tried with Netscape, Konqueror et al., no luck).
Slashdot: Tabloid for the nerds. Stuff that doesn't matter.
Using a validator during daily development of your website, whether static or dynamically generated pages, in the long run just makes it a lot easier because you catch a lot of careless errors. Imagine how hard it would be to write syntactically correct C code without using a compiler!
- Validate Your HTML here
- Validate your CSS here
- Use Validators and Load Generators to Test Your Web Applications
If you'd like to try validating a couple pages real quick then click here to validate:Mike
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
I tried the same thing with the User-Agent setting in Konqueror and it worked as well. I don't understand why mozilla doesn't have such a feature.
... is why would one country (UK) would want to pay lots of money to a corporation in another country (US) for the service that they could do on their own.
I hardly believe there's no expertise on how to this sort of stuff using Linux/*BSD in UK. Remember articles about Linux being used to her highness's website? This way UK would invest money back into their country and create more jobs this way instead of relying on US to do quite sensitive stuff for them.
Thank god this would never happen in US, like investing in the company in Russia (remember the one we had cold war with?) to do crypto stuff for linux filesystem.
Wait... I think that did happen
------------ Internet? Is that thing still around? H.J. Simpson
You could always change it to a bogus version number, after all who would believe someone logged in using MSIE9?
B1ood
Note to self: pasty-skinned programmers ought not stand in the Mojave desert for multiple hours. -- John Carmack
Two empires in decline... what's the problem? Darwin will take care of both of them eventually.
Edith Keeler Must Die
Tested Konquerer 2.1.1, Netscape 4.77, and Mozilla nightly (20010528 or somesuch), all on Linux; all failed.
So, they want you to be running either MacOS or M$FT stuff........ it's not so much the browser as the OS.
-----
ahh but if 90% of the people get them on line, then there won't *be* a physical line for you or anyone else who won't submit to ms, to wait in. They'll close up shop & make you buy a new pc & a legal OS of course.
Microsoft may not be very responsive to public opinion, but the British Government sure is.
HMG is pretty responsive to "public opinion", but it's the opinion that the editor of the Sun tells them to have.
Issues ? What are they ? William Hague's new hairdo - now that's an "issue" that's getting the haeadlines today.
Democratic governments have to provide equal access to government services
Why ? Joe Sixpack just doesn't care enough. Our election is going to be fought on the basis (as ever) of tax handouts, and if we're lucky, who's to blame for Foot and Mouth (a bunch of subsidy-scavenging sheep farmers in Cumbria, doing dodgy midnight deals with black sheep).
they risk having a large group of pissed off voters on election day.
How about pissed off IT geeks ? Three times in the last year this government has put me out of business. First IR35 made freelance IT contractors untenable (although it's still OK to work in just the same way if you're a lawyer or an accountant). Then RIP offered me a two year prison sentence for most interesting uses of one-shot crypto (I was just trying to sell music on-line, with a per-play charging model). Now they've lumped all IT "security" people in with nightclub bouncers and parking wheelclampers, so that I can't even login as root unless I've bought a licence and had a police background check. Again, lawyers and accountants serving the same industry have been exempted.
Blair wants 100% of all government services online by 2005.
Blair is still at the "Every school should have its own Information Superhighway" level of understanding. He's so clueless that yesterday he even let M$oft use him as a PR bunny for an Office XP launch photo-op.
>This is the first that I've seen of a country supporting monopolization.
ever heard of the USPS?
But to access their secure areas of the web site:p ?content=help_what_do_i_need_to_register.htm
http://www.gateway.gov.uk/help/0/help_template.as
Looks like they are not consistent with stating what browsers you require.
Running Explorer 5.1 preview for OSX seems to let you in quite nicely. No sense of not working at all. I could test more, but fact checking isn't the readers job...
The reason is your browser on Linux doesn't have 128-bit encryption. If you did, it would work.
here
Sorry, in a forum like this it is imperative that the reader check the facts for themselves.
Hmm, seems that with the anti-trust decision almost in their pocket and no new process having chance to get through sooner than in 2005 earliest, Microsoft is starting all-out war on all fronts. After all, I always thought that it is just a matter of time before frontpage will add to all pages a small javascript header which for non-IE browsers replaces the content with a simple message Your browser is not compliant with MS standards and therefore cannot view this page properly.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
According to their help you only need:
What do I need before I can register?
Before you register with the Government Gateway, check the requirements below to make sure you have everything you need:
Hardware
* PC or Macintosh
* A working Internet connection
Software
PC Users
* Microsoft Windows (Windows 95 and above or Windows NT 4 and above)
* Internet browser. Either Microsoft Internet Explorer (v4.01 or later) or Netscape Navigator (v4.08 or later).
Your browser must have Javascript and Cookies enabled, and be capable of supporting 128bit SSL.
Apple Macintosh Users
* Mac OS version 7.5 or later
* Internet browser. Either Microsoft Internet Explorer (v5.0 or later) or Netscape Navigator (v4.08 or later).
Your browser must have Javascript and Cookies enabled, and be capable of supporting 128bit SSL.
But it looks like Netscape or Mozilla should work just fine.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
To quote the web site:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later.
Clearly you can run Netscape, but it must be on Windows or MacOS. I tried hitting the site with Netscape 4.x on Solaris and it won't come up.
I think (and I'm not being sarcastic) that fact checking *is* the user's job in this kind of forum. It may even be its distinguishing characteristic. You are not reading a newspaper. This is a different medium with different rules. You may view it as irritating and unprofessional, and I understand that. I, however, enjoy blundering towards some sort of half-assed consensus. It is addictive, involving, alive. Reading /. is not a passive act.
First they have to hold their entire population under massive surveliance, now they propogate a monopoly. Yeah UK!
scarier than Blair, scarier than Hague, scarier than BSE, scarier than F&M! Arrrggghh!
My UID is prime!
Well, this certainly changes the H.M.$. for ship designations now! ;-)
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
ROTFL
Tony Blair was wandering around kissing M$ arse yesterday. Bill bought the Uk government a few years ago with a scheme fro putting M$ products into schools.
_O_
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
...even worse, Blair let an MS shop in the gov make the decisions and axe all the free software shops.
oh well, it might be a freebie now, but man will MS bend them over in the coming years once they're hooked.
very annoying to see all the posts that say "read the article! it works for me!" obviously, you didn't read the article, cuz it states that SOME parts work with SOME certs on SOME versions of netscape on SOME platforms.
sheesh.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
If someone offered me a monopoly on citizen-to-government interactions, I'd take it.
-- Kris
Really, this is starting to get rediculous. It's no wonder web companies aren't making any money, they can't even steal half-decent news well.
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
Read the system/browser requirements page for more info. Windows/MacOS/Netscape/IE are all explicitly supported, and Linux probably as well as long as your browser handles digital certificates properly.
Slashdot definitely needs to do some fact checking before they post. And then all you Linux zealots point the finger at Microsoft for spreading obviously false rumours.
This story is just a pile of crap. It was just while the site was being developed that Netscape and other browsers weren't working correctly, that for the most part, has been fixed.
If you actually go to the site and click on the "What do I need before I can register?" link, you'll see that they support both Netscape and IE on PC and Mac platforms. Only certain services require IE 5.01 or later, and that's due to differences in certificate support, not anything having to do with .NET.
When they started the demo of Office XP, I was sitting there waiting for a BSOD, but unfortunately they cut the broadcast after a couple of minutes.
Even the news presenter said "Well that just looks like an advertisement for Microsoft."
Now what does that mean? Aren't most Macintoshes personal computers as well? Some of us have Linux or another unix running on an x86 PC. Saying "PC == x86/windows" is not far from "computers and IT == x86/windows".
Think different, man.
NO CARRIER
"...who couldn't get in with 6, and earlier versions of Netscape, Opera (even 5.11 pretending to be IE) don't work...."
Looks like you're kinda wrong.
---
This
I have read the rest of your posts in this thread and it is clear that you are insane.
You need help.
Step away from the computer, it's watching you.
---
This
Wish I could moderate this up!
I'm quite sure that UK is a democratic society and with democracy goes the freedom of choice.
u st iceBillmuttermutter
Ha! You wouldn't know it.
muttermutterRIPmutterMedicalDatamutterCriminalJ
You wonder if next election you won't be able to vote unless you're wearing Nike shoes and Tommy shirts.
--------------------
I was just feeling good, and instead of posting something really dumb, I tryed to be funny. Guess once in awhile the geek gets out of the box..
Indeed, though, I do read, and react. In case your really board, and live in one of these states, you might want to read about UCITA law, you should read its comming to Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Delaware, and maybe your neighborhood too. Take the time to read what they can do. And then drop a line to your state repesentive. Take the time to do it!
As indeed we did contact our state representatives, and had a nice discussion. Made them aware of what we thought about it. Then took the time to provide hard copies of interesting articles from the net.
Again, it was just a week stab, at a small pun, on the origional post.
I will never pay taxes in the UK.
Course, I live the the sovern country of Texas!
Man im in a good mood...
I'm quite sure that UK is a democratic society and with democracy goes the freedom of choice. Well, the government has just removed that from people who use non-Microsoft products. This is the first that I've seen of a country supporting monopolization. In the process they are breaking the foundation of democracy and freedom for the people. This is stupidity. Atleast in Canada most government documents are accessible in many forms, whether they are online, mailed, faxed, etc. Also for the online forms, all that is required is a browser that supports 128 bit SSL encryption, not a Microsoft based one. I hope Canada does not decide to take after its Monarch nation in it's rash decision.
Now what does that mean? Aren't most Macintoshes personal computers as well? Some of us have Linux or another unix running on an x86 PC. Saying "PC == x86/windows" is not far from "computers and IT == x86/windows".
--
I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
..after an European Parliament report on Echelon which "recommends all Europeans use encryption and open source software." Here is the article.
--
I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
The web is about standards. Those things can be built for 99% or even more of the netizens, if so wanted.
--
I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Just for reference, and to add a bit of fact to the flamewar, I just hit the site with Netscape 4.7 from my Linux box. The result? A page reading, to start,
Unsupported Browser
You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out which browsers are supported and which settings to use.
Supported Browsers
We have made the Government Gateway compatible with as many browsers as possible, on both PCs and Macintoshes. (snip)
BTW, for some reason I had to remove the whitespace from pasting to get this past the Lameness filter. No idea why.
Speaking as someone who's had to spec a UK Government website before, I find this browser 'lock-out' surprising.
A company I work for was given the tender to design and create a new website for the (then - 1999) new Ofgem government agency for Electricity and Gas markets - core to this tender was a *27* page fax which outlined the governments provisos on web page design. These included:
No frames.
No animated gifs.
No flash/shockwave.
WebSafe colours only.
Must be completely viewable at 640x480.
Must be accessible with any browser.
Provision must be made for text-only browsers.
Provision must be made for disabled viewers - with the ability to navigate by keypresses, rather than by mouse.
Pages must print fully, and with no background colours.
No single page could exceed 35k.
Mostly good guidelines - and we followed them - to the letter. (Didn't get the job though!) I can't understand why these guidelines have been thrown out of the window.
--
jambo
system.admin.without.a.clue
-- js.
People without computers also helped pay for the site. If Linux support is added, will you demand a tax refund for those who choose not to buy computers?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I have to wonder who will take the fault for this if/when these servers are compromised by backdoors that no one thought of patching......right about then I think the "L-word" will look like a much better answer...
We need someone fromt he UK to clue us in on if they have something similar to civil rights legislation and anti monopoly regulations that can be enforced.
This kind of nonsense is expected in a totalitarian system, say China, or Iran (insert your favorite country to hate here)
Heck, in the US, I am sure there would be calls to the congressmen, investigations, etc.
Welcome to Microsoft Planet. God help us when the system crashes.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Nor I. I think that people need to start specifying OSes as well as browsers to avoid confusion here. I certainly can't view it using any browser under linux, and I've tried Opera 5 final (identifying as everything), Mozilla 0.9, Netscape 4.76, Amaya and (as if I need to mention it) links.
this is the fastest responding website I've ever seen.
He used to play Monopoly a lot when he was a child. So don't blame Gates, blame Monopoly. Maybe he should sue them :)p says that you can access the site using Windows or MacOS and IE4 or later, Netscape 4.08 or later.
Apparently this page https://secure.gateway.gov.uk/html/bad_browser.as
I just browsed around the site a bit using netscape and didn't seem to have a problem... could it be that someone just perused the article and jumped to a hasty conclusion?? I can't imagine such a thing happening on Slashdot, but... it occasionally snows in hell, I suppose.
Yes, indeed....but Texas could be next, don't you think?
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Thatcher tried to charge a poll tax, and there were street riots. But this is kind of like a poll tax...
When you realize you'll never equal Kirk or Picard -- THAT is an epiphany!
A List of government sites and what they run their servers on:
diss.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) FrontPage/4.0.4.3 PHP/3.0.12 on Linux
www.homeoffice.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.3 (Unix) on Linux
www.ukonline.gov.uk runs
IBM_HTTP_Server/1.3.6.2 Apache/1.3.7-dev (Unix) on Solaris
barn.ccta.gov.uk runs
Lotus-Domino/5.0.2 on Solaris
www.gtnet.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.3 (Unix) (Red Hat/Linux) on Linux
www.parliament.uk runs
Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on Solaris
www.ombudsman.org.uk runs
Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1 on Solaris
www.cabinet-office.gov.uk runs
Minstrel-httpd/10 on NT4/Windows 98
www.patent.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.14 (Unix) on Solaris 8
www.dera.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.14 (Unix) on Linux
www.detr.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.3 (Unix) on Linux
www.open.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.3.3 (Unix) (Red Hat/Linux) on Linux
seek.open.gov.uk runs
Ultraseek/3.1 Python/1.5.1 on Linux
www.number-10.gov.uk runs
Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4/Windows 98
www.statistics.gov.uk runs
Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on SCO UNIX
www-library.ccw.gov.uk runs
Apache/1.2.0 on NetWare
-- Conexant/Rockwell Modem HOWTO http://linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Conexant+Rockwell-modem
Of course, this assumes that The Register even tried IE 4 on the site. :-P
Nevermind the fact that Blair seems too worried of the NAFTA to make any complaint about Bush's policies on the Kyoto Agreement
Nevermind the fact that Blair's 'Ethical Foreign Policy' has gone the way of millions of tons of water and millions of displaced turks.
Nevermind all the companies that have their hands firmly in the back pocket of Uncle Tony.
Nevermind that Blair doesnt seem to have fulfilled a single promise on his 'promise card', and is most definitely being elected for a second term.
Nevermind the fact that the UK public tend to think anyone in Politics that is actually employing their brain, rather than knee-jerks, to something is indecisive.
Nevermind the fact that this is probably the most important time for these things in History, yet most newspapers are more interested in what celebrities were seen drunk last weekend.
Coz it'll all be taken care of. honest.
after all, its above our heads.
Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
They don't stand in line over there.
They queue.
Bryguy
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
So, you just believe everything that is written in a file that ends with .asp?
DUDE, they don't check for the browser's capabilities, they check for the browsers name.
They've got a list of who can work with the system.
They have to update this list as a browser gets capable. Shit, this is a misunderstanding of tha web!
yeah, this are my concerns too. :(
I expected some paranoid freaks to jump at the first post, but the lack of linux support seems to be a bigger problem to the crowd
What with Tony being given a rather impromptu public demonstration of Office XP when he was at their HQ in Reading today this is looking particularly bad. Although this behaviour could really be expected of Microsoft it really is a damning inditement of the Labour Party's PR folk who really should know better. Is Labour the Party of Business or the Party in the pocket of Business?
You say that as if the only issue is getting the servers to work. I'm sure that getting the servers up to specs was not their biggest problem. You must have forgotten that they also have to build a fully-functional web site that works on their servers... Most web site compatibility problems don't come from the servers being used (very few ever do). It comes from the coding of the web site and additional programs and scripts that are used to communicate to the back-end processes. (How many times have you not been able to view a website because it was hosted on an NT machine while you are using Linux? Chances are higher that you were not able to view a site because the site's authors did not write code for all browsers.) They are most concerned with getting the site working with the majority of the web browsers and users out there. (Which just so happens to be IE 4/5 on Windows 95/98/NT/etc...) Given their timetables, it would not be feasable to start out supporting everyone and everything...
--guru
My own tests shows it works fine.
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
While I agree that it suck, I must point out that it is really fast, despite the /. coverage.
Interesting, I'd like to know what they have in terms of hardware.
But I guess that M$ would want to make sure that it perform well for future "success story" material. uhm
--------
It's not just the UK. The Microsoft way seems to be becoming the government way more and more. The American president now comes with a $300 mail in rebate. It kind of makes you wonder if the the Democrat choice for 2004 will come with 3 years free MSN access.
A while a go, I tried to visit shockwave.com from my linux box only to be met with a nasty screen telling me I must use Mac OS or Windows to access thier site. Even changing my user-agent screen didn't let me in. I can't understand why they'd go out of thier way to blobk linux users.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I immediately went to the site when I read this abomination. I used konqueror from my KDE 2.2 alpha install. I didn't have a problem. I get the website, I click on the links and it works fine. I haven't (yet, at any rate) found anything that doesn't work.
Could someone indicate what links on the page are the offending links so I could give em a go?
Incidently, I didn't set my useragent to specify anything so it is reporting itself as "konqueror..."
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
I'm surfing in Opera, identifying as IE 5.0, and I couldn't get into the site when I clicked the link.
You are mistaken. Apparently you are not using netscape. If you were using netscape, you would get a page saying that your browser is not supported.
The page is wrong (too) because it (as the help-page) states that the site supports Netscape 4.08 or later...regardless of what the pages state, IT DOESN'T WORK.
AC is AC
"Did you actually visit the Site? It says it ..."
Did you use Netscape?
Didn't think so.
AC is AC
The poster missed the fact that you can still use Opera for that website, as long as you set it to identify itself as MSIE5.
--
Kiro
90% of the population is not better when that means the government is forcing a choice on you
sheeple, please wake up. the government is not here to make choices for you. the government is supposed to be about equal access (democratic ones anyway). i can make my own choices
the animal doesnt even have opposable thumbs, focker!
who didn't see this coming? england is more pro-Microsoft than the US is.
you need a linux job? don't go to england. you'll be stuck developing microsoft proprietary solutions...
A simple curl -A Mozilla\/4.0\ \(compatible\;\ MSIE\ 5.5\;\ Windows\ 98\) http://www.gateway.gov.uk/ > page.html? 'Seems reasonable enough, for those who wish to see it, yet have no windows boxen to toy with . . . (: I am sure there are easier ways.
Fnord.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
I don't think that Jesus posted this story.
I went to the site with Netscape 4.7 on Win2000 and it worked fine. I must be missing something because it only says older versions of browsers are not supported. Also what is strange is that they are refusing 40-bit browsers. I work as a webmaster at a bank and we use what is called a step-up cert. It actually upgrades the connection to 128 bit even if the browser is 40 bit, maybe that is an US only thing.
To all those people who say,"It supports Netscape, read the article!" You are missing the point:
.NET initiative. Basically, they do not see the dangers of putting sensitive Government information in the hands of Microsoft (back door anyone?).
.NET networks, bringing them to a grinding halt. The UK government has already been shut down on previous e-mail clogging system issues.
I have been following this for sometime and knew awhile ago that they intended to the
This is what is going to happen:
1.A virus is going to sweep across all MSFT
2.Someone from a foreign country will crack the site and steal some information and post it, or threaten to.
3. UK Taxpayer will pay the bills for these licenses when they need to keep up the subscription.
Sorry to say, but this is an outrageous waste of taxpayers money.
Another offending site that uses MSFT only crap is www.classicfm.co.uk which is a shame 'cause I liked to listen to their broadcasts, but its not worth the boot into Windows for.
Deja vu!
According to register, you CAN use Chambersign certificates and use Netscape 4.x. Please read the article.
Also, it's a step in the right direction. Having access to gov't services online is fantastic. And yes, not everybody can get to them, but with, what, 90% of people able to get to them online, that's a hell of a lot better than 100% of people standing in line.
I use Netscape on Linux (latest version) and I can't even get a link to a contact for the site.
I've been a web developer for over 6 years now, and I've never been tasked to build something that can't be supported in Netscape and IE on all available platforms. It's not that difficult! Trust me. I know.
If these guys (i.e., the Microsoft tech team) can't build a site that's cross-browser compatible, then, quite frankly, they are incompetent boobs. The British government needs to find someone who either knows what they're doing or doesn't have a hidden agenda.
-- My choice of computing platform is a symbol of my individuality and belief in personal freedom.
it's not like netscape doesn't add non-standard tags.
well said, well spoken. I view every piece of my web page(s) in 5 browsers to make sure they all work. Fortunately I can't view them in IE . . . :-)
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
I first went to the following site, as referenced below in the comments:h tm
http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/e-tax/checkbrw.
From there, it was clear that everything worked. I was only able to browse the subnet regarding the Self-Assesment Tax Return, which I am hardly eligible for (Living as I do in the US), but if I were British, I could almost certainly do what I needed to do.
From this I can only draw the following conclusion: M$ has set up a series of gateway sites which have no legitimate purpose whatsoever; instead, they appear to be clearly trying to force people to use their garbage. If only Tony Blair knew what a horrible mistake he has made...
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
They'll pay, I tell you! Just wait until they get their insurance quote!
muahahaha!
"The only way to learn a new programming language is by writing programs in it." - Brian Kernighan
Damn! I can't believe that!
~AdmrlNxn
Whistler is to Zeus as Linux is to Hercules
~Admrlnxn
"I got your mom in my trunk"
Microsoft may not be very responsive to public opinion, but the British Government sure is. Democratic governments have to provide equal access to government services or they risk having a large group of pissed off voters on election day. Blair wants 100% of all government services online by 2005. As a Mac user (IE for Mac doesn't work either), I know I'd be pretty angry if I got left out in the cold.
Not only that, but the standard browser on the upcoming Symbian 3G cell phones will be Opera, not IE. Symbian looks to be a leader in that arena, so the majority of wireless users wouldn't be able to access government sites if this continued. Microsoft is going to have to buckle on this one and use open standards, guaranteed.
This
Quit whining - it's a web site article. Somebody read your submission, and somebody else read this one. Grow up. Are you more concerned with the article's content or getting credit for reading it??
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
When the promise of the World Wide Web is to provide a more or less OS independent access to information, it is sad that it comes to situations like this.
One could spout off more comments about Microsoft's "Embrace and Extend" practices, but this is another matter. I think part of the blame could be and probably should be applied to the customer as well as the manufacturer.
The dot-net initiative has scared me from the moment the term was uttered. I knew instictively that MS wants to use the internet as a way of doing things and inherently, it means locking things up and out. It's just MS's way. I'm not going to say if it's good, bad or ugly...only that it's reality.
The course of action, however, is not to attack Microsoft because until it is dismantled, it will always be what it is and I can't blame it for being what it is. The criticism lies with the customer in this case. Contact them and protest the use of these exclusionary tools and services.
to do that you have to validate, and the results are in line numbers of the lines that is in sync with what the sever sends. I have spent hours tring to find a stupid mistake, in one of the included files just to get valid code. I order to do this you have to do things like think, and know your own code. You can't expect some M$ techie using Frontpage to know the code, anymore than you can expect them to close the backdoors to the servers before shipping. I do it because I don't have enough time to do it the first time so I damn sure don't have time to do it again. Using PHP can make it tricky the line number thing does make it hard to find the offending mistake but at least the fix is propagated through out the site; a lot of my pages have the little xhtml 1.0 icon at the bottom. Some pages still need work,
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
--
Top Most Bizarre/Disturbing Error Messages
MS has been doing this for years, and its news now?
Certain webpages can't be accessed from certain browsers, so really, this article isnt news
Slashdot Hypocrisy at work?
I posted a factually correct, more informative article detailing all the misgivings, and the correct information regarding which browsers could access what.
I did not use immature, provocative language in my submission, and it was submitted before this item was posted.
*Why* was this item posted? it seems to me that Slashdot now just wants to promote FUD regarding MS at every opportunity, driving hits up. I've not a number of more intelligent posters have left the community recently, and as it's the discussion I come here for (obviously not the articles, never has been) I think I'm off too.
It's been a nice ride, but now you're near the bottom now and it's time to get off before you land in that pile of shit at the bottom. Doh! I was too late I just got a little caught on my foot.
-------------- Russ
Conscience? Is that *still* in the dictionary?
...is if they mandated that all their users used Linux+Netscape to access the site. What a slashdot fiasco that would be...
Oh, wait, no it wouldn't be.
I agree, though. If you're building an app, it's just so hard to decide whether to build for 95% of the population or 2%...
If MSIE 5.01+ is the only browser that supports these 'functions,' then as long as it is Standards Compliant, then Mozilla should be able to access the site too. Maybe Microsoft (as they have before), is using html tags, etc... that are not standard (like the <marquee> and </marquee> tags), so that MSIE is the only thing that can view it. This, then, indirectly forces users to download MSIE 5.01+ and generate hits on Microsoft's website, and increase the MSIE market share by 1 more person, which is what they want.
<sarcasm>They do seem to be having trouble generating revenue.</sarcasm>
However, I do agree that it is partially the fault of whoever hired Microsoft to do the job. Also, the site explicitly states that the Equifax certificates do not work with any version of the Netscape browsers so, gee, your only choice is to download MSIE 5.01+.
How do you know somebody works for Microsoft? Ask them a question, and they give you a technically correct, yet totally useless answer.
...when you find out they're totally mis-leading.
>THUMPTHUMP
- I am made of meat.
Its funny it says that because I get that unsupported browser message when I use netscape 4.51 on my Sparcstation 10.
London, UK - Today Microsoft acquired the United Kingdom through a merger with the government. This will set up the first corporate owned country, in which the stock holders of Microsoft will determine how the country is run, not the country's citizens.
"That's nothing new to me" said one person on the street, "Microsoft has been taking over our lives for years. Figured it was only a matter of time till they bought the whole country."
Bill Gates declined to comment on his newly appointed position as "Almighty General of the 'Use Windows or we'll whoop your ass' Army." Microsoft stock rose several points with the announcement of the merger.
Back in the states, one stock holder said "Microsoft is playing it smart, they'll probably purchase the U.S. next and declare monoplies legal."
~Ken
Right now, we're looking at an early roll-out of a sophisticated service that has incompatibility problems with some of the enormous range of computers out there. Of course Microsoft made sure it was most compatible with their software first. Nobody should be surprised that the M$ programmers did a better job with their own product. Despite the usual sentiment that they're forcing conversion, there really hasn't been any reason to call foul yet. There should be wider support with time, and let's keep in mind that the Government isn't forcing citizens to use the service. Most people use IE anyway (let's face it...there aren't too many options) and the government, with Microsoft's help, and a minimum of expense, has just begun to offer an extremely nice service to those people. Maybe they should have written their own client, which was non-platform reliant, but they managed to release the service earlier and cheaper by using preexisting technology and cutting out a fairly small (though vocal) segment of computer users.
My Karma is so good, I'm the Dalai Lama...or something.
Poor, poor HTML.
Just imagine:
"Sorry. The jpeg file you are trying to open isn't supported by your browser."
I pity the W3 consortium. It's hard to waste time and energy trying to organize a standard and then discover that nobody seems to care.
I was able to get on with mosaic. Lynx didn't work th0.
Fax Baba!
mod parent (me) down :)
I think I'll stop here.
Just inform the government that you will continue conduct all business with them using paper forms, filled out in smudgy pencil and/or leaky fountain pens until they make the website standards-compliant.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Apart from the fact that you obviously know nothing (ie the comment "Why is it scary? Microsoft stuff is the best." confirms this fact), you have missed the point. It wouldn't matter if M$ stuff was the best - to have a Government service tied up by proprietry SW which by default would mean that anyone wanting to use this service would have to also purchase (from M$, already a giant without morals) some expensive proprietry SW. The issues involved here are far reaching and should not be taken lightly. These types of decisions only go to widen the gap between the "information haves" and the "information have-nots". Just another case of the M$ marketing machine snowing people who make technical decisions with little or no technical knowledge.
How much of a goose are you? It's pretty plain that you appear to be yet another M$ apologist that hasn't actually checked the facts. There are no surprises in the tactics that M$ uses and why they use them - they will use any means possible to force us to buy their products.
You have got to be kidding me. Tjis is a web site not rocket science. No matter how many bells and whistles were required M$ would have thrown a lot of resources at it because it is high profile. Three weeks would have been more than enough time to get it going on all platforms - if they wanted to...
You really have no clue - do you?
What if I am on a budget and I have a PC running Linux (ie the best and cheapest way to go computing). Are you saying it's OK to discriminate against me because I can't afford to pay the premium prices M$ and Apple charge for their operating environment? This isn't a technical issue this is a marketing issue - simple.
It is reallly a pleasure talking to people who have completely missed the point. Read my lips - IT DOESN'T WORK WITH ANY BROWSER ON LINUX!!! I won't call you a fool as you called me (but perhaps you should consider it a good description of yourself) and I won't lower myself to make derogatory comments about the intelligence of your ass (although I am sure yours must be a rocket scientist) but I will say this, I have dealt with place mats with more insight than you appear to have.
Are you even on the same planet as the rest of us?
Maybe, but at least I am able to formulate my own opinions without any help from the M$ collective.
I'd really like to have a verbal joust with you about this but I'm not into unarmed combat.
Yet another posting from someone who doesn't beleive in one's right to choose - I guess what we are seeing here is a new type of dictatorship. Just because M$ is huge and powerful they must be right in everything they say and do and make, and we must follow them without question. If we don't follow them then we are branded either insane or dangerous to the common good and must be exterminated... anyone out there read Animal Farm or Farenheit 451
Linux has a high profile among university IT depts., many academics and free thinking individuals who choose to be different from the crowd. Historically, communist governments after the revolution, round up academics, intellectuals and free thinkers and shoot the lot - after all, you don't want anyone with a brain interrupting the bleating of those who are stupid enough to do everything their told. Having suffered years of Microsoft I have only this to say to Comrade Ballmer: BBBAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOCCCCCCCCCKKK KKKKKKKKKKKKSSSSSSSSSSSS
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
What almost everyone seems to be missing is that you need to enable javascript. That plus 128 encrypt gets you in.
Do a google search before posting.
It is my goverment's responsibility to allow me to use any browse I want
(Incidentally I don't mind falling into this "effectively 50%" category, I think they're justified and and acceptable levels of tax TBH)
So essentially by blocking that info (deliberately if you think about it - they _have_ to do some work to block it!) they're blocking people who have a right to access, both those who can afford it at home (and can choose any brower they like) and those who use it somewhere cheaper (ie free) but don't have any control.
Bear in mind that many of the other sites which are .gov.uk do not have this problem, and the policies used by many UK publicly owned sites generally try to follow these sorts of principles mainly because they have to be publically accessible by many:
- Test the site out using Lynx - this allows you to tune the website such
that >99.999% of people can see the site. (You're down to the size of
a small village then who can't access it)
- Make sure that anything fancy you do on the website will work with
Netscape Navigator 4.0X. This means simple javascript, some layers,
Java 1, CSS1. That way your _fancy_ parts of the site can probably
be accessed by >90-95% of people accessing your site.
- Consider using Shockwave flash instead of Javascript & Java - Macromedia
have put alot of effort into making their content widely accessible by
all - heck there are tools for less that 50 quid for creating this stuff
since they opened up the protocol :
- Consider using Real Media rather than Quicktime, or Windows Media
Technoloy for the same reason as shockwave.
As someone who's had to design a publicly owned site, I generally choose Linux Netscape & Lynx for testing since Linux Netscapes Java support is pretty flakey, it's CSS support is OK, but limited, and there's more twiddles in MSIE. Essentially if it looks good and works in both of those, then it generally works well in MSIE and other things well. (eg little things - like have a menu bar on the right had side of a page formatted with tables rather than the left can make a huge difference for example)It's sad that some people don't aim for simple visibility...
...and that was with Netscape 4, and konqueror! That's just *wrong*... (one letter to my MP coming up...)
43rd Law of Computing:
All your taxes are belong to Microsoft.............
Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
Microsoft would be foolish not to take advantage of this chance to bascially force the entire UK onto windows. I mean, this is an entire country, for crying out loud - the British government practically begged for this to happen. And of course, this is a perfect demo for .NET
As for why Blair & Co went along with this, it was probably a combination of factors:
1.) They probably believed (correctly) that the majority of home computer owners use some version of Windows.
2.) Microsoft, realizing how many copies of windows they could "convince" British citizens to buy by having it by required for the web site, was probably willing to take massive losses on the site itself. They probably underbid everyone else in existance.
3.) The British government is a group of politicians, not webmasters. They probably believed everything M$ told them about how great IE is. I mean, when has a giant American corporation ever lied?
4.) Microsoft has massive manpower resources. They probably were able to get it done faster than any competitors.
As much as I dislike the fact that this is happening,I have to admit microsoft could not have done this scam better. Hat's off, guys.
I'm the stranger...posting to
That pretty much comes down to "use Microsoft Internet Explorer" on Windows or MacOS, and that's exactly what people are complaining about here.
Indeed. Most web site compatibility problems actually come from using proprietary software and gimmicky features. You know, things like ASP, VBscript, frames, Flash, and that sort of stuff. The same kind of misfeatures are also responsible for delays.
They are most concerned with getting the site working with the majority of the web browsers and users out there. (Which just so happens to be IE 4/5 on Windows 95/98/NT/etc...) Given their timetables, it would not be feasable to start out supporting everyone and everything...
Sure it would be. If they stuck to plain HTML, not only would they be compatible with all browsers, they'd also be able to deliver faster, lower costs, and keep their site accessible to people with disabilities. Anything else is a waste of money for a government site.
The web site seems to just refuse to talk to people if they don't come from a Windows or MacOS machine. They could simply check for the certificates when they are needed, but they actually seem to check for the browser id string. What if Opera or Konqueror get the necessary certificates tomorrow? What if they already have them?
As for saying you can't do your tax return on-line in Netscape? Bollocks. It uses straight HTTPS. I've just completed mine. Did any of you think to check for yourselves? I doubt it, you just saw "it was written by Microsoft" and your knees starting jerking.
Maybe you just have a knee-jerk reaction when people criticize your favorite monopolist? You seem so far in the Windows world that you don't even notice the inconveniences Microsoft causes to competitors.
Ok I tested the site with Konqueror and Netscape 4.76 on my SuSE 7.1 Linux system.
....
No chance to get in with my first try.
Why ?
A page popped up which told me to use Windows 9x/NT/2000 or Mac OS.
That is the point that Joe dumbuser will reach.
If I tell konqueror to identify to the site as MSIE 5.5 on Win98 I manage to get in (and to figure this out is no trivial task to my father or my wife). And best of all I really can see an accurate page. No problem for my browser to view the Page. And therefore no reason to keep me out of it.
And that is the kind of FUD I hate. They check which browser and OS you use and say you cant use this site. No chance because of your wrong system and browser that is not working with this content ?!?
But my Konqueror on Linux can view the start page
Even if I only want to look at some content. If I dont want to do real "usefull" things, I will be thrown out of the club.
btw. If this would happen in germany, payed with my money (tax I payed to the government). I would stand up and fight for my right to use the content for which I have paid with my tax.
Use it without beeing forced to buy a special software.
greetings Harald
"ich bin drin !"
Works great in Konqueror,just define your useragent for the site to be
Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows NT; DigExt)