Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 44 Deletes Fine-Grained Cookie Management (mozilla.org)
ewhac writes: Among its other desirable features, Firefox included a feature allowing very fine-grained cookie management. When enabled, every time a Web site asked to set a cookie, Firefox would raise a dialog containing information about the cookie requested, which you could then approve or deny. An "exception" list also allowed you to mark selected domains as "Always allow" or "Always deny", so that the dialog would not appear for frequently-visited sites. It was an excellent way to maintain close, custom control over which sites could set cookies, and which specific cookies they could set. It also helped easily identify poorly-coded sites that unnecessarily requested cookies for every single asset, or which would hit the browser with a "cookie storm" — hundreds of concurrent cookie requests.
Mozilla quietly deleted this feature from Firefox 44, with no functional equivalent put in its place. Further, users who had enabled the "Ask before accept" feature have had that preference silently changed to, "Accept normally." The proffered excuse for the removal was that the feature was unmaintained, and that its users were, "probably crashing multiple times a day as a result" (although no evidence was presented to support this assertion). Mozilla's apparent position is that users wishing fine-grained cookie control should be using a third-party add-on instead, and that an "Ask before accept" option was, "not really nice to use on today's Web."
Mozilla quietly deleted this feature from Firefox 44, with no functional equivalent put in its place. Further, users who had enabled the "Ask before accept" feature have had that preference silently changed to, "Accept normally." The proffered excuse for the removal was that the feature was unmaintained, and that its users were, "probably crashing multiple times a day as a result" (although no evidence was presented to support this assertion). Mozilla's apparent position is that users wishing fine-grained cookie control should be using a third-party add-on instead, and that an "Ask before accept" option was, "not really nice to use on today's Web."
Seems to be as fine grained as I need.
That is just one of the reasons I went back to Firefox 43
Ah, I see they are following the Gnome school of user interface design.
They seem to be really trying to shoot themselves in the foot lately.
I have an add-on that keeps only the cookies I explicitly select, the rest get deleted whenever I close Firefox, or when I manually delete cache and cookies with shift-control-delete. Just get that and have all the 'fine-grained' control you want.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
They should just rename it Netscape Communicator be done with it. And from the ashes a Phoenix will rise. Again.
I leave a site, its cookies explode.
Was Yahoo p***d off about people who don't allow some cookies to be set?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Eat. Shit. Then. Die. We. Are. Bought. And. Paid. For. By. Those. That. Track. YOU! And. We. Like. It. Like. It. Yes. We. DO!
Funny, I can now think of something else that's "not really nice to use on today's Web."
...users wishing fine-grained cookie control should be using a third-party add-on instead...
That's a laugh. What third-party add-ons are going to remain after another year or so of breaking them with nearly every damned release?
Mozilla seem absolutely determined to jump the shark.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
No browser works the way I want it to "as is." I have to install a handful of 3rd party addons or whatnot before a fresh install is not crazy-making. I'm not sure why this is a big deal. You can still manage cookies however you want with 3rd party extensions so who cares?
Man, you really need that seminar!
Multiple crashes a day my ass. Choke on your fucking advertising money.
from the inside out. new open source browsers need to take its place so mozilla can finish dying
Does code have to be "maintained"? What if it's already bug-free (or doesn't have any bugs that anyone notices)?
Moreover, the allegation that enabling the feature destabilized the browser is pharmaceutically pure bullshit. I've been using the feature since its inception, and have Firefox windows open and running for days at a time without ill effect.
Contrariwise, I just went to check my cookie store, and found a bunch of new, unapproved, unwelcome, provably unnecessary cookies have appeared in just the week since I moved from v43 to v44. Deleting them after the fact is not a solution. Once set, tracking can take place immediately. The damage has already been done.
The proffered reasons for the change are easily shown to be false, so I do not hold out any hope that Mozilla management will have a change of heart on this matter and reinstate the long-standing feature.
Would anyone care to recommend a cookie management add-on?
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
FF has now passed both New Coke and Microsoft Bob on the list of all-time worst acts of product assholery.
The UI for this option was removed in 2012 and you're just noticing now. Well done!
they lose their identity and userbase. It's strange how they fail to understand that.
The Australis UI was the first step. Now this. Soon, a looming XUL deprecation which is an even worse idea -- I wonder what's the point of using Firefox will be then.
In short we had a fantastic web browser, now we have a Chrome wanna-be. Soon, we'll have a Chrome copy with Gecko underneath, but who on earth cares what rendering engine they are running?
... according to their gay-friendliness, rather than their competence and loyalty to OSS values. Enjoy the new, bloatwared and advertising-friendly Firefox. Enjoy also a dildo in your ass.
Mozilla's apparent position is that users wishing fine-grained cookie control should be using a third-party add-on instead, and that an "Ask before accept" option was, "not really nice to use on today's Web."
The same could be said for Firefox 44, really.
licet differant, aequabitur
I agree, that this should be an add-on. Not many people are using this and many of those who think cookies are evil just set Firefox to automatically delete those when Firefox closes. You can still can set cookies you want to persist in settings anyway. If there is no add-on yet then I think they should have inform about this earlier, so someone interested could have made add-on for those that use this feature.
I used this feature long time ago, but then I noticed that auto-clearing cookies on exit and manually set those few sites that I am actually interest of is actually better way to handle cookies.
When I eyeball the January 2016 browser market share stats, it looks like Firefox is now at or just under 7% of the browser market. That's across all versions on all platforms!
IE 11 alone has almost as many users as Firefox does in total. The same goes for iOS Safari 9.2. Hell, even Opera Mini almost has more users than Firefox does! Desktop Chrome 47 has over 3 times as many users as Firefox does in total. Chrome for Android 47 has 2.5 times as many users.
These numbers should be scaring the living shit out of Mozilla. They should be in a constant state of panic right now. Firefox is getting decimated.
Maybe Mozilla doesn't realize it, but Firefox is the only product they have left that has any sort of a user base. Seamonkey, Thunderbird and Persona have been left to flounder. Firefox OS was a massive disaster, maybe even worse than GNOME 3 was. Rust and Servo are dead end projects. Bugzilla is a relic.
Why the fuck will anyone, especially the big players in the game, give a damn about what Mozilla thinks or wants? Mozilla already has so little influence. Soon enough Firefox will have so few users that nobody will give a fuck about it or its users, which in turn means that Mozilla will lose whatever small amount of influence it does have left.
It's fucking insane how Mozilla isn't reacting to this. It's fucking insane! It's like they're nearing the edge of a cliff, but they're running faster and faster!
I don't want Mozilla as an organization to vanish. They play such an important role in keeping the web free and open. Yet they also seem to be so intent on destroying themselves! Please, Mozilla, wake up! Please, Mozilla! PLEASE! Stop ruining Firefox! Stop making yourself irrelevant! Please, Mozilla! Please stop it!
I built a new Windows image for our workstation PXE deployments, this time without Firefox.
If you're going to be just another trash browser you're no longer getting installed on the systems I'm responsible for.
In true Mozilla fashion, the discussion on the bug tracker has been censored, so people can't even effectively complain about it.
Brendan Eich would not have allowed this to happen. The furor over his support for traditional marriage was just a pretext to remove a politically inconvenient person from a key position, and the SJWs who perpetrated that lynching just useful idiots serving the financial elite.
^^^ This
Self-Destructing Cookies was a genuine break-through in cookie privacy.
I wish the idea would be extended to other tracker-enabling downloads like fonts and HTML5 web storage.
Not renewing my smart phone either.
WaterFox's latest build seems to still have the granularity. For those not familiar, Waterfox is a high performance browser based on the Mozilla platform. Made specifically for 64-Bit systems. It is speedy and all your FF extensions should work. In fact, in upgrading to WF, all of my FF prefs, extensions and addons were in place and working right on first boot. https://www.waterfoxproject.or...
Dear Mozilla developer,
I don't want to search for your fucking unnamed addon, firstly because I don't want cookies to be accepted from certain domains even before I close the browser, secondly, because it's idiotic to remove something that was useful and didn't cause any harm.
Fuck you, fuck whatever advertising company paid Mozilla to remove this useful feature as well as for adding all the anti-privacy bloatware that I regularly have to disable (pocket, peerconnection, etc...), and fuck your gay-friendly CEO.
Regards,
An unsatisfied firefox user, soon looking soon for alternatives
Everything we need to know about the sorry state of Firefox is shown by the new Brave web browser that Brendan Eich is creating.
Look at what Brave's FAQ page says:
For those who don't know, Brendan Eich worked at Netscape, created JavaScript, co-founded the Mozilla project, and was even the CEO of Mozilla as recently as 2014. He has a very long history with the technology behind Gecko and Firefox.
Yet despite having so much experience with Mozilla's technology, his team has gone with Chromium as the basis of their browser. Like their FAQ says, Chromium is better than Firefox "by every measure".
The problem for Mozilla is that while Firefox has become total shit, they have no better alternative to offer. The Servo project is sputtering, at least partially due to it using Rust, which itself is an immature programming language.
I don't know what Mozilla is going to do. The only option available now is to throw away Servo, throw away Rust, and try as hard as they can to get Firefox fixed up. But even that probably won't be enough. Things are looking extremely bleak for Firefox.
I fully agree that functionality that can be provided by add-ons need not be provided by the core program. In fact, this level of extensibility is a great selling point for Firefox.
The problem is what to do with those who set the preference in the past and have yet to install an add-on. I think it would have been better to take the "paranoid" default (deny all), making sure they have at least as much security as they had before. I find it hard to believe that there are many users who were regularly approving each cookie separately but couldn't dealt with the breakage caused by a temporary "deny all" default.
I fucking hate sites that cause cookie storms.
I got hit by one today, at Chandra Observatory, of all places.
Set your cookies to request always and prepare for > 30 of them: http://chandra.si.edu/photo/20...
However, it doesn't seem like this solution of Mozilla's is a great one if one were to take the new default into consideration.
But it's why I'm still on v39.0 - can't keep up to all the changes
When a corporation allows the morons in the executive suite to use the business to grind personal political/psycho/sexual axes, the corporation risks losing focus on what it's supposed to be all about. Mozilla is just supposed to be making money by providing users with a quality, standards-compliant, non-Microsoft-monopoly web browser. Apple is just supposed to be making great computer hardware and software. Both companies have recently veered into the cultural ditch of progressive sexual politics and seem not to be noticing the warning signs flashing in their faces. Tim Cook's been attacking Christians lately and I presume the share holders are not supposed to be concerned that many of their customers are Christians and that while he's fiddling, there seems a dearth of new products on the horizon. The man's not in his position to push his politics. He is there to see to it that Apple is always innovating and that it is making mountains of money for shareholders by happily selling products to everybody.
You could have been less provocative with your comments, which will likely lead somebody to downgrade your post to "troll", but there is is indeed a nugget to your argument which people sometimes miss. Businesses are just supposed to do business.
Yes, I "shouted". Obviously to OP has no clue.
Denying the creation of a cookie in the first place has nothing to do with deleting them when Firefox is closed (whoever closes ALL of their FF windows anyway?).
I hope Pale Moon keeps the feature, but, IMO, FF44 is now nearly useless.
For web fonts and similar 3rd party assets you want Smart Referer. Unless the primary website's address or id is encoded in the URL, this stops such tracking.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Firefox records and submits telemetry, by default, without gaining consent. If you're going to abuse your user, why can't the user at least benefit? They have telemetry, so they at least know which users have this feature enabled ("I use this feature"). If their telemetry is thorough, they know which users enabled it, then disabled it and left it off ("I tried this feature. I then stopped using it"). Now you know how popular it is, rather than just using a supposition as one of your major reasons, you have data.
They have Bugzilla. So they can query all bugs that this feature caused or was involved in. They then look at their ~100 lines of code and can decide on how disruptive the codebase is as a result of it being unmaintained and have an idea of how this state detriments the user experience.
It's crashing "multiple times a day"? Where's the data? Firefox records and submits crashes by default. Where's the query you ran that gives you this evidence? Is it the fault of the feature, it's lack of maintainer, or is something breaking it that is the fault of neither?
Fucksake. Spy on us then just ignore the damn science that it does? How very asinine.
Firefox has been getting slower and not quite right. But I clung to it for exactly this feature, fine-grained management of cookies. If it's gone in the next version, then I can start looking for faster neater alternatives.
> Unless the primary website's address or id is encoded in the URL, this stops such tracking.
Which will be the case for any asset used for tracking, so that extension is a no-op for this purpose.
new project @ https://brave.com/.
Just stop sending referer headers altogether. It breaks so few sites that fine tuning it is just not worth it.
It's cookie option is to delete any new cookies received when shutting down.
...that Firefox is disconnected from its users. I should have jumped ship earlier. They would ignore (or mark complete/will not fix) my bug reports, and they hijacked firebug's keybinds for their own inhouse version (which was a pretty shitty thing to do). The interface thing with australis caused a lot of hate with people. They probably lost a lot of user base over that because people like familiarity; breaking it completely just caused people to leave. The more they change the more people will leave, and their drop in user base is proving it.
Firefox has lost its way so badly it hurts. What a shame.
Thank gawd for forks.
Wow. What a pathetic excuse, they're the maintainers, FFS. It's 'unmaintained'? ... So 'maintain' it, THAT'S YOUR JOB.
If I could use that excuse at *my* dev job, I could save lots of work for myself. But I suspect my management would rightfully tell me to suck it up and update/fix the damn code.
I haven't tried to use the cookie prompts for quite some time, but the basic functionality still seems to be intact in the preferences under Linux.
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
I've used FF since Netscape. I'm done.
This is where I get off the bus. I've used Firefox for years, Netscape before that - gladly so. But the Firefox people have gone from great developers making a useful product, to pretty good but a little squirrelly, to UX weenies and marketing assholes, to evil sellouts actively trying to screw me over. Fuck 'em.
On a completely unrelated note, if you use Linux, chattr +i is your friend. Works on directories as well as files too. Just sayin'.
Do nothing people complain about bloat... Move features into extensions, people complain features are disappearing..
What is the better option?
People also like to bash about bloat in FF... Moving features that aren't used often into extensions is a great solution...
They are easier to maintain, and can be developed independently of FF... Faster iterations, and release of features to end-users, etc..
See Subject.
I have been using Firefox since the early days. Sure there were some releases with problems but 44 for me is the worst ever in my opinion. I have completely wiped it from APPDATA and Programs, reinstalled, yet frequent crashes. Crashes immediately if loading from the taskbar in Windows 7. If I use any plugins like Ad Block Plus or Noscript I get high CPU utilization and it sucks up allot of memory. Occasionally it just disappears in the middle of doing something.
Now with the cookie thing which I use frequently in web development and other plugins that will be borked, that's it I am done. They are forcing me to adopt another default for all my work.
I will check out waterfall listed above. I started to look at Palemoon before this and thought do these alternatives have dev teams or just one guy that will some day will disappear?
Was Yahoo p***d off about people who don't allow some cookies to be set?
That's a serious accusation, did you even care to read the bug before writing that?
:)
:)
FYI, while the deal isn't public, it was rather clear that it was contingent on Yahoo reinventing their search engine as they did.
So you can be confident that it's more likely Mozilla that pressures Yahoo than the other way around.
Besides the bugs, mailing lists, wiki, regular monday meetings, irc channels, etherpads, source code, review notes, commit comments, is all open.
I work at Mozilla there is very little private communication, apart from security bugs, just about everything is completely public.
The notes I make on stuff I work on is in a public etherpad, with links often posted on IRC.. So anyone can could jump in an make a mess of my notes
And you are welcome to participate! (and welcome to ask questions, as well as leaving useful comments, suggestions in my notes)
Also there is no way employees at Mozilla could keep a secret like that - You can be sure someone would blog about it
(Lots of people at Mozilla are in it for the mission)
I hope we still have the option for chunky chocolate chips!
This report is about removing optional user control over which cookies get created. Firefox 44 still allows users to delete individual cookies. Open up Preferences, go to the Privacy tab, click on "remove individual cookies" (a hyperlink) and you will see a list of all your cookies, grouped by domain name. Click on the ">" before a domain name to see the cookies for that domain. Select and delete as desired.
Personally, I prefer to use NoScript but allow websites to create cookies. That way I can whitelist domains in NoScript until a website works, without having to worry about which cookies to allow. Once I've finished with a website, I can always delete all the relevant cookies until next visit. This works well for me; YMMV.
To be fair, I haven't used Firefox for a LONG time. When I did use it, it was when they first forked from the original Mozilla code base and went through a gazillion different name changes. That being said, I think this story is overblown and most of you are overreacting. Mozilla is simply trying to move (the UN-MAINTAINED) fine grained cookie control to the hands of some excellent add-on developers. The current code that resides in the Mozilla repo is completely un-maintained. Anyone like me who remembers what Firefox was like back in the day will know what I mean when I say 'less' is 'better'. Can Mozilla do stuff better? Without a doubt. Should this be a change that stops you from using Firefox? No. Disclaimer: I don't use Firefox outside of Ruby on Rails selenium tests.
In case Firefox 44 drops the permissions list entirely (does it?): How does one export these cookie settings to a format readable by humans and replacement add-ons / other browsers?
Stupid features like this are either enabled or reside in the browser and now they're taking away privacy features with each release.
Just a small sample of stuff from about:config:
dom.event.clipboardevents.enabled
browser.taskbar.lists.*
social.*
social.manifest.facebook
browser.safebrowsing.*
While I don't mind cookies that much I do mind the retarded EU-mandated cookie-warnings that keep popping on every site possible, Fortunately there is an addon for that too!
I don't care about cookies 2.5.3
Available for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and some other less popular browsers (no version for IE).
In EU we have a dumb piece of legislation that requires almost every webpage to require a permission for any cookies it may be saved on your device. I have a strong impression it was initially a web browser that was required to acquire such permission.
Some where back in the dim recent past, Firefox's ESCape key no longer meant abort everything and return control completely to the user. No matter if the base html is incomplete, no matter if some goofy-gumdrop JSON cloud-abortion is in progress, or a 302 redirect is in progress. No matter if you'll have to settle for a blank page because CSS cannot decide what color the text will be. Just ABORT. Now the ESC key means hardly anything.
Now in the face of incomplete loads, packet loss, severely delayed DNS lookups, javascript tumors that are busy metastasizing to grow the page from seeds using repeated lookups to unresponsive and overworked database servers --- all of this results in pages that won't stop loading, tabs that will not close immediately, or even pages with visible readable content that will not respond to scrolling requests or link clicks... until... exactly what I never found out.
The purported reason was to save the poor deep data content providers from aborted transactions caused by unwashed masses hitting reload and ESC. I say, if they're overloaded or vulnerable in any way to aborts or identical re-submits they are vulnerable to script kiddies too and someone has not done their job properly or provisioned their servers adequately. I never considered the ability to abort a web load as anything but an intrinsic RIGHT --- until it was taken away. It was,like, what are they thinking?
I've had to force-close Firefox to regain control. And no we're not talking about Flash or embed delays either, I run NoScript. This is Firefox's native process refusing to abort everything under all conditions.
If content providers bite into some apple of complexity (for example) embedding advertising and load sharing schemes that do little tricks (such as) using gobblegook DNS names with low or zero TTL, they deserve to be sandbagged for their effort by the masses until they re-think their decision and (god forbid) roll back in the general direction of 'static' content.
Unfortunately this is something a third-party addon cannot really fix. If ever I was temped to fork a whole project and create a new subculture to fix one aggravating feature=bug this is it.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
So, basically Firefox has decided to permanently become a steaming pile of shit, and they focus on interface designs and features nobody cares about, while ignoring the features which made us use it in the first place?
You know, a lean standard compliant browser which allowed us control over our privacy and security? The things we actually want out of it.
Removing that feature is fucking moronic, because it allowed us to say "yes, I trust this site and they can set cookies, but all these sites can piss off, never ask me again".
Basically Firefox is now suffering from the Open Source feature rot ... if nobody is maintaining it, it's because it's not a shiny feature, which means it gets neglected.
I've used this feature for years, and it has NEVER caused a browser crash, not once. Silently saying "sure, go ahead, set all the cookies you want, we don't care" is a bullshit outcome from an organization which has become far too focused on shiny baubles instead of maintaining the good pieces in there.
Over the last bunch of years I'm more or less forced to conclude that the Mozilla foundation has lost the plot of what we wanted out of that browser in the first place.
OK, folks, so what's the best cookie manager plugin for Firefox? Because for those of us who run multiple browsers for multiple purposes with different levels of security and the like, the options seem to keep dwindling.
I have to say, it seems like Mozilla is just running themselves into the ground, and are jumping from one thing to another ... apparently now it's killing off Firefox OS and jumping into IoT.
Sorry Mozilla, you act like you're driven by marketing idiots with ADHD these days. Pathetic.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Cause who the hell would use that feature?
If you don't trust a site here is some advice.... Do not go to it.
Maybe stop looking up all your child porn while you pretend to actually be working...
I guess thats why there are forks
Even Pale Moon has forked Gecko, not just Firefox.
Used to be good, now wants to cow-tow to advertisers. See you later.
The feature that was removed is a basic cookie management option where addons do a much better job with a better UI.
If you really want to do fine-grained cookie management, use an addon. I use Cookie Monster.
I like that Mozilla removes useless limited features that I long ago replaced by a powerful addon. The Firefox core must have good APIs (for example cookie management, cookie filtering) on which extensions can be built.
Unobtrusive may fail to satisfy the requirement that the notice be "conspicuous". And in some places, such as the Netherlands, the law is or recently has been that a site operator must obtain the user's explicit consent before setting a persistent cookie. This leads to "Accept cookies and continue to website" interstitials.
You have chocolate cookies with lemonade flavored bits? Where can I get me some o' dat?
as well as not giving the user a choice, such as a popup with only an OK button.
Then they give the user a choice that may be familiar to long-time users of porn sites: a popup with an Accept button and a Leave button that goes to a popular search engine or the front page of The Walt Disney Company's site.
vast majority of websites do not really have to annoy their visitors with cookies popups, because they work just fine without cookies (and most of the rest could be made to work without them).
On an e-commerce site, how do you implement an "Add to Cart" button without cookies? Users expect one anonymous visitor's cart to be separate from another anonymous visitor's cart, and they don't expect to have to create an account and log in (through a cookie-free method such as RFC 7617 Basic or a TLS client certificate) before adding an item. Or do you instead plan to associate a shopping cart to a query parameter in the URI? That breaks when a user shares a link to a product.
They do seem to have an interesting approach. On that same FAQ page they discuss their philosophy on ad reduction, ad replacement and removal of tracking stuff. There could be a substantial discussion on ad replacement alone.
Ads are something no user wants, but every advertiser and content-hoster wants. Bottom line is ads will always be around in one form or another. And they will always be evolving and changing.
Maybe ad replacement is a potential solution. You can't get rid of them (permanently everywhere that is), and you do want some content to survive (e.g. Slashdot), so maybe an ad vetting/voting/whitelisting system has some merit.
I come here for the love
In short, I've never seen a good, clean, reliable way to link a user to a session that doesn't involve cookies. If you've got the magic solution to that, please...I'm all ears.
Have the user create a username and password and use RFC 7617 basic authentication. Or have the user create a TLS client certificate.
Regarding ad voting, the potential for abuse of this is high (i.e. people hating every ad). One solution would be that your votes are always relative. In other words, do you like this ad more or less than other ads. This way some ads will always bubble to the top. And advertisers can then study/learn from those ads, and/or choose to run those ads more. And when they do that, people grow tired of those ads. So they bubble down the list and force new ads to appear.
This may not sound that great, but right now I am staring at sites that pad with screen after screen of white space, or force gigantic menus to overwrite content or display zero content when I try to ad-block them (via no JS and hosts anyway). Point is that we are already in the middle of an arms race.
I come here for the love
There is an option to "reopen last session" on start. You get all your tabs back :)
When I tried it, I got "Problem loading page: Server not found" as I switched to each tab. Firefox saves the URI, not the entire DOM, and it goes back to the Internet to re-fetch the page after I reopen Firefox. If I'm not connected to the Internet, such as if I'm on the bus to or from work or the grocery store, I get a dozen tabs of fail.
Maybe nobody had done any maintenance on it because it didn't need any. From the sounds of it everyone here found it to be working fine so there doesn't seem to be much need for the code to have been touched.
Seems like we need someone to go in and to small insignificant changes to the parts of Firefox that we want to keep as is.
It says it is a front end for the internal firefox features.
What happens on 44? Have you tried it?
For the record, enabled sites have a type=cookie, permission=1 (Allow) or 8 (Allow for Session), in the moz_hosts and (more recently, clumsily introduced and inconveniently distinguished by leading protocol IDs that hence needed to be set twice, for http and https) moz_perms tables of the respective /home/user/.mozilla/firefox/*.default/permissions.sqlite (readable e.g. by SQLite Database Browser).
Backup while you can.
Been showing them that here for a DECADE Trax3001BBS (ltns by the way, how have you been) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... for more speed than other browsers (was the SPEEDKING for its time year in year out) & it is by FAR still the MOST FLEXIBLE BROWSER there is in options - groundbreaking, & least security flaws too (HTML 5 ready & 64-bit too).
* Great minds KNOW alike!
(No browser to date offers SO many options, especially for security protection (& C/C++ coded speed too) in options in BY SITE preferences for cookies, scripts, referrers, frames/iframes, customized CSS or PAC files use, plugins ONLY ON DEMAND & far more...))
APK
P.S.=> Opera's even BETTER/FASTER & MORE SECURE when you combine it with a good hostsfile & who makes the best hosts files? Hey, you know - "yours truly", gratis, courtesy of:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit http://www.start64.com/index.p...
Giving users more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity online from 1 single file you already natively have for FAR LESS resources yet doing more than crippled by default sold out to advertisers so they don't work right, clarityray/pagefair/blockiq detected & blocked useless, wasteful in cpu/ram and messagepassing overheads usermode slowness (vs. hosts in far faster kernelmode) INFERIOR browser addons... apk
Um. No. Good sense, best practices, and appropriate paranoia should have it change to "Deny". Remember "default deny" as a security principle? It needs to apply here.
(The 'silent' bit is underhanded as wellâ¦)
I suspect the people who make these decisions are the kind of people who's first response to a permissions problem is to chmod 777 all the files. Because, y'know, getting it to work is more important than taking a minute to think about what's really being asked.
I select "Ask Before Accept" because I normally do _not_ choose accept. And if the website doesn't work, well, it's a crappy website and I can direct my attention elsewhere. Silently changing this seems like a breach of some sort of trust.
Hosts do more for less APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...
-
FREE, not 'souled-out' to advertisers!
Does far more w/ far less more efficiently vs. addons (clarityray blockable, redundant + RAM/CPU wasteful & 'souled-out' crippled by default) & local DNS servers @ home.
Fixes DNS' security issues & stops tracking @ webpage + DNS levels via 1 file you NATIVELY have!
(Firewalls do rest on FAR less used IP address trackers/threats vs. host-domain names).
-
Obtains data vs. online threats & ads via 10 reputable security community sites - easily edited by you using my program.
-
SPEEDS YOU UP 2 ways:
Adblocking ALL ads + local RAM cached favorite sites @ TOP of hosts for faster resolution vs. remote DNS (for reliability + speed) vs. other "so-called security 'solutions'" SLOWING YOU!
-
All via what you already have vs. illogically "bolting on browser addons 'MOAR'" (clarityray detected/blockable + usermode slow & increased messagepassing, cpu + ram overheads)
-
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee verified it's source as safe http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... ) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
&
MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per a VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
&
Installer-> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
-
* "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend".
APK
P.S.=> By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:
"The image this title brings to mind is a mighty military commander who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" -> https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & THE WORD = hosts!
(Accept NO substitutes)
...apk
Beware, the parent post links to malware, and it's a nasty one
The other AC pointing this out wasn't clear enough.
What happens on 44? Have you tried it?
Nothing happens. Cookie Monster is not a fix for the prompt. In fact AFAIK there is no add-on that replaces this exact feature. One I've used since Netscape days, one I noticed had gone missing immediately. Thanks Mozilla, I went back to v43 and won't every be upgrading again. Between the pre-fetch crap when rolling over links, the Pocket crap and this? I'm out. Congratulations!
DNS is prone to going down a lot & uses more resources + moving parts to exploit or breakdown (kaminsky redirect poisoning & DNS amplification attacks being another).
APK
P.S.=> For networks, you take BIG chances (home users can make do with a hosts file they can easily manage vs. DNS many parts)... apk
My wife and I login on the same browser all the time without closing tabs. In fact, I do this all the time when paying bills.
Win+L, click your wife's name.
Logout on the 3rd tab, login to my wife's card account at the same bank, setup a payment on her card, log it in my spreadsheet.
If your wife authorizes you to pay her bill, then perhaps instead of you impersonating her, she should add you as an authorized manager of her account. Separate authentication (e.g. you are LordKronos) from authorization (e.g. LordKronos may withdraw from checking account 963852741 and make payments on 4345 6789 3210 6543). Ask your bank how to set this up, or find a bank that allows this.
Beside that, there's just the matter of security. I'm not closing my browser because I need to keep pages open, but I want to logout of websites so that I'm no longer using.
What is the attack model associated with staying logged in as yourself?
You're trying very hard to contrive some arrangement that makes basic authentication look like it's not utterly broken, but sorry...it's utterly broken.
The feature exists. I grant that the feature is broken. But it's possible to unbreak the feature. So instead of starting a web site that requires use of cookies, one can instead build browser extensions or contribute browser patches to unbreak the feature.
And there's no way most banks are going to let me pay her card from my account.
Since when are banks that issue payment cards no longer willing to let a cardmember add a joint account holder?
Hell...Discover, for example, won't even let me manage my own two cards from the same account...I need a separate online account for each card.
Then perhaps that bank needs to Discover some cardmembers that aren't you. Facebook gets a lot of things wrong, but separating auth and auth is one thing it gets right: each person has one account, and that account is connected to resources.
But thanks for clarifying. Now I have a sound bite to use against cookie haters: Basic auth is broken because logout in long-running browsers is broken.
See subject: ROUTERS = MASSIVELY PRONE TO EXPLOITS STUPID! Want a boatload of examples of that from many manufacturers too? Ask!
* FACT: Hosts do FAR MORE for FAR LESS than any other SINGLE solution & they are NATIVE to your system's IP stack already in kernelmode efficiency + speed!
(Especially vs. slower broken or exploitable usermode crap, especially browser addons which I noticed you give up on, & DNS servers in software too, NOW RUNNING FOR ROUTERS, lol, which I can dust easily too - see above, & ask! You'll regret it... lol!)
APK
P.S.=> There IS no "manual labor" using my program to create hosts & migrating them by scripts is easy for central admins on large networks too - you fail again as always, fool... apk
You failed to answer even the first question in response to your first point:
For someone that claims a lot, you don't really have much to back it up.
You completely ignored all the caveats I pointed out.
Except if you read my post, I stated I use addons and I can't even remember a time when they broke on me during updates. I also stated I don't use them for advertisement blocking which is what your assumption was.
You have to go to each damn computer to set it up.
Why the hell would large networks use hosts file instead of end point security solutions like Lumension?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Hosts + OpenDNS compliment one other. I don't resolve 'every host-domain there is' via hosts. Only favorites @ top of hosts (24 for beating indexing > 2++ million records).
It's where folks spends MOST TIME online & it's faster + more efficient vs. calling remote DNS servers.
Placement of favs for FAST RESOLUTION from memory (hosts = cached like any file) also saves CPU cycles, RAM, + I/O turning off the slower usermode clientside DNS cache service vs. using kernelmode diskcache (no context switch overhead to IP stack this way too).
The rest of my hosts files' entries are 3,821,870++ blocked entries vs. malware & ads of many kinds.
I use REMOTE FILTERING DNS SERVERS that help block malicious sites/servers/hosts-domains via DNSBLs (not locally as a separate redundant wasteful recursive server or a service/daemon).
---
OpenDNS:
208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220
Patched vs. Kaminsky redirect poisoning - 99.999% ISP DNS aren't.
---
It LIGHTENS remote DNS loads - admins should like that!
I make my hosts file (& do reverse dns pings for FAV sites for faster, more reliable, & safer connections) using:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...
FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability.
Does more w/ less more efficiently vs. browser addons & local install DNS servers + fixes DNS' redirect security issues!
Obtains data vs. threats & adbanner blocking via 10 reputable security community sites!
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per a VERY recent test of them http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
APK
P.S.=> GUARANTEED safe per 57 antivirus programs recently in its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
Its 32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
& Malwarebytes folks verified its source safe http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi...
& it's installer http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...
... apk
"P.S.=> There IS no "manual labor" using my program to create hosts & migrating them by scripts is easy for central admins on large networks too - you fail again as always, fool... apk" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 10, 2016 @02:22AM (#51476965)
See subject (BOLD IN QUOTE ABOVE TOO ESPECIALLY) as it makes my point for me you are SO DESPERATE you'd stoop to that...
APK
P.S.=> Here's YOUR partial quote ONLY in UNDENIABLE Black & White:
"P.S.=> There IS no "manual labor" using my program" - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday February 10, 2016 @04:16AM (#51477257)
Never thought you'd STOOP TO SUCH A "LOW" Ash-Fox but you have REVEALED yourself for all to see - thank you!
Funny how you won't touch the list of routers I can put out that are SCREWED WITH EXPLOITS too eh?
LMAO - not!
FUNNIER STILL is how you don't deny DNS exploits I noted in DNS Amplification attacks + Kaminsky redirect poisoning flaws too!
NOT!
FUNNIEST OF ALL?
You switched TOTALLY from browser addons, to DNS, to routers - but 1 little file folks already natively has does it all with less moving parts & for FREE... apk
http://www.bing.com/search?q=d...
* See subject, that link & eat your words...YOURS may not go down but then, NOBODY USES IT TO GIVE A SUFFICIENT LOAD TO MAKE IT GO DOWN either, lol!
(Kaminsky flaw redirect poisoning can happen to you, & IF you try fix it using TCP vs. UDP, you DOUBLE YOUR OVERHEADS, making DNS even MORE INEFFICIENT - patching it can f'up MX records iirc as well, so you're beaten @ every SINGLE turn... DNS amp attacks make it even MORESO!)
APK
P.S.=> It's always just (& you KNOW I've just GOTTA say it now don't you? Ah, but of COURSE you do) "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" making a do-nothing "ne'er-do-well" LIMITED MENIAL in Ash-Fox EAT HIS WORDS... lol!
... apk
I'm 1/2 a century++ old & have nearly a quarter century of hands-on professional experience in the art & science of computing on nearly every level there is in it - do you HONESTLY THINK I haven't setup & configured AND MAINTAINED DNS servers? Guess again, & plenty of them on corporate networks (in the Fortune 100/500 too @ times) though I primarily did software engineering over that timeframe, to be that, YOU HAVE TO BE A FULL DOMAIN-WIDE ADMIN & many times OR YOU CAN'T DO YOUR JOB fast... that's how it works, from experience professionally (& I've been @ computers as a non-pro since 1982) - how about you by way of comparison?
PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH I NEVER STATED TOO, along with earlier PARTIAL SELECTIVE QUOTING ME TOO?
What a bullshitter - I never SAID even ONCE that my "router goes down" OR "my dns goes down" (hosts do the job for less here, better).
APK
P.S.=> Answer the questions & I've put out DNS GOING DOWN BY LOADS OF VALID, CONCRETE, VERIFIABLE & UNDENIABLE information from valid sources - where's yours? ANECDOTAL & YOUR SINGLE EXPERIENCE (allegedly, probably a lie) ONLY - but if you're NOT placing extreme loads on YOUR personal DNS? Sure, it might not go down - not enough to TAKE it down is put onto it is why more than your "expertise" which I have NO CLUE of since I've never seen "Ash-Fox" written about by respected sources (whereas I can literally show TONS in my name by comparison) OR wares even by "Ash-Fox" - THIS IS THE PRICE OF YOUR "FAKE NAME" ONLINE rookie - languishing in anonymity, lol, just another "FACE IN THE CROWD" (Tom Petty) - I took the "ROAD NOT TAKEN" by comparison & STICK MY NECK OUT THERE WITH MY NAME ON MY WORK AND MY POSTS unlike weasels that hide behind FAKE names... apk
Ok - you NEVER have to take down YOUR DNS server for maintenance of the DNS server itself for patching OR the OS?
* Ask Coren22 if HE has to http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (let's let another /.'er speak for me)... lol, that alone busts you in 1/2 easily & from another /. user (let alone the TONS of evidences I put up for DNS literally GOING DOWN from BING, Google would show more...)
* Lastly, in closing? SEE SUBJECT - "just '2ez'" as always, lol!
APK
P.S.=> Answer that - lol, THIS is going to be GOOD, lol... IF you don't? Then you're not running it SECURE AS CAN BE since it's foundations wouldn't be patched... apk
http://blog.emaze.net/2013/08/...
http://blog.ptsecurity.com/201...
http://blogs.pcmag.com/securit...
http://ea.github.io/blog/2013/...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/h...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/0...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/article...
http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/0...
http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/0...
http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/0...
* PARTIAL QUOTING ME Ash-Fox? Again?? The lists I am putting out are going to CRUSH your do-nothing ass on router "reliability" & security... lol!
(My routers don't go down by the way loser...)
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
See subject - LMAO !@ U & again": YOU DON'T PUT ENOUGH OF A LOAD ON YOUR ALLEGED DNS SERVER YOU STUPIDLY USE THAT EATS MORE POWER & CPU/RAM + OTHER I/O vs. hosts TO MAKE IT GO DOWN, stupid!
(Other than you NOW admitting you have to restart it, lol, so YOUR DNS DOES GO DOWN after all, little liar...!)
APK
P.S.=> I suggest you NOW take a peek @ ROUTER RELIABILITY from here on downward too chump -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Realize 1 thing: You have to HOP from DNS, to ROUTERS, etc. but all I need is 1 SINGLE FILE I ALREADY HAVE TO DO WHAT I NEED DOING vs. your bullshit... apk
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://lifehacker.com/software...
http://linux.slashdot.org/stor...
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
http://mobile.slashdot.org/mob...
http://linux.slashdot.org/comm...
http://linux.slashdot.org/comm...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...
APK
http://phys.org/news/2014-03-w...
http://seclists.org/cert/2012/...
http://securityevaluators.com/...
http://securityevaluators.com/...
http://slashdot.org/submission...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://soylentnews.org/article...
http://secunia.com/advisories/...
http://secunia.com/advisories/...
http://secunia.com/advisories/...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.bing.com/search?q=r...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://thestack.com/root-comma...
http://thestack.com/zyxeltech-...
http://threatpost.com/12-milli...
http://threatpost.com/dns-base...
http://threatpost.com/internet...
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/s...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/+...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/2...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/5...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.dshield.org/diary/A...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/B...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/C...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/D...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/D...
http://news.softpedia.com/news...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.dshield.org/diary/E...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/E...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/E...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/F...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/J...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/T...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/W...
http://www.dshield.org/forums/...
http://www.dshield.org/forums/...
http://www.dshield.org/forums/...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.eweek.com/security/...
http://www.itworld.com/article...
http://www.itworld.com/article...
http://www.itworld.com/article...
http://www.majorgeeks.com/news...
http://www.majorgeeks.com/news...
http://www.net-security.org/se...
http://www.networkworld.com/co...
http://www.networkworld.com/ne...
http://www.networkworld.com/ne...
http://www.networkworld.com/ne...
http://www.networkworld.com/ne...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.securityfocus.com/i...
http://www.securityfocus.com/n...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2..." ADD_DATE="1449501567" LAST_VISITED="0">Lock up your top-of-racks, says Cisco, theres a bug in the USB code â The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/P...
http://www.wired.com/threatlev...
http://www.zdnet.com.au/cisco-...
http://www.zdnet.com/cisco-fix...
http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.c...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.c...
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.c...
https://threatpost.com/exploit...
https://www.hackread.com/cisco...
https://www.incapsula.com/blog...
https://www.schneier.com/blog/...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
http://news.com.com/Bug+expose...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009...
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
* STILL BELIEVE routers = best security alone?
YOU SAID YOUR DNS NEVER WENT DOWN TOO?
Funny YOU ADMIT IT DOES -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you FAIL vs. myself as usual, noob do-nothing "rookie ne'er-do-well" CHUMP!
APK
P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each) & YOU OUTRIGHT LIED ON YOUR DNS NEVER GOING DOWN TOO - HUGE fail (one for my bookmarks)... apk
See subject? It's PUREST TRUTH fool, lol - 1 grenade (on a router which I've proven happens by 225 evidences of it) OUT she goes...
BOTH DNS & ROUTERS too!
(Which YOU SAID DNS "NEVER GOES DOWN" yet ADMITTED it has to stupid AFTER I FORCED YOU TO -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND I posted TONS OF EVIDENCES WORLDWIDE IT DOES? STFU already... lol!)
ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING DNS IS VULNERABLE AS HELL TO BOTH Kaminsky Redirect Poisoning AND dns AMP attacks...
APK
P.S.=> It has TRULY been a pleasure catching your LIES & showing anyone reading how "reliable" ROUTERS aren't -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
YOUR PARTIAL QUOTES OF ME TOO, YOU LITTLE FUCKING DO-NOTHING ZERO BULLSHITTING "ne'er-do-well" FUCK?
THIS IS THE PRICE OF YOUR SORRY ASS TRYING VAINLY TO "take me on" & LOSING as always, LOU-ZER (that should be your "registered 'luser'" name here, I have so MANY times I've smashed you INTO THE GROUND with your bullshit, it's not funny anymore)... apk
See subject: w/ security issues e.g. Kaminsky redirect poisoning flaw & DNS amp attacks - "GOOD SOLUTION" (lol, not).
* FACT: YOU HAD TO ADMIT DNS GOES DOWN (after I forced it out of you -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )
Besides wasting more CPU, RAM, & other forms of I/O in more moving parts complexity that also eats more electricity - such "efficiency" (not) in "Bolting on 'MoAr'", lol - when hosts do what is needed from 1 part you already natively have.
APK
P.S.=> Same w/ you "running to routers" - I pointed out a GOOD 225++ (considering my list is ONLY PARTIAL too) flaws in those being BROKEN INTO LEFT & RIGHT also - another "SOLID SOLUTION" (lmao, NOT) by Ash-Fox: The "ne'er-do-well" MENIAL troll! apk
See subject above? It's truth & BOTH DNS + ROUTERS ARE FULL OF SECURITY ISSUES GALORE, as well as downtime.
APK
P.S.=> I've backed myself with 100's of evidences from reputable sources vs. your MERE "anecdotal evidence" so, I'll let others decide for themselves... apk
That works against you too then & ROUTERS + DNS are a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE (huge one, see my posts above regarding BOTH...).
APK
P.S.=> You FAIL - I use what I already vs. ILLOGICALLY "Bolting on 'MoAr'" that does what needs doing FOR LESS (cpu/ram/other I-O, messagepassing, moving parts complexity + room for breakdown & exploit) have that my program FURTHER PROTECTS & also FURTHER REINFORCES vs. threats online (& nothing in usermode can break thru that protection beyond WFP/SFP while my program resides resident protecting hosts (& yes, I've tried to corrupt it myself even & couldn't))... apk
APK, I already stated this in a previous post in another way. But, if it's a big concern that you need HA, just use technologies like BIRD with BGP. Problem solved, you can stop being salty now.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Let's see: 1st you tried DNS (I pointed out how often it goes down by the ton & security flaws galore in it)!
2nd, you tried ROUTERS (I pointed out 225 known instances, there are MANY MORE, of them being security flawed)
FACT: BOTH REPRESENT A SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE THAT'S HIGHLY EXPLOITABLE!
(Due to what I pointed out - your dependence on them is flawed on those grounds alone!)
* NOW you're spouting even MORE BS?
Please... lol!
* Hosts files do all that's needed FOR LESS!
APK
P.S.=> Hosts files do all one needs for less yet doing FAR MORE for more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity (easily migrated across ALL endpoints on a network by a central admin & scripts)]
Best data source for such hosts files for said central domain-wide admin? You guessed it:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://www.start64.com/index.p...
By "yours truly" - (accept NO substitutes) - WHAT HAVE YOU PERSONALLY CREATED THAT'S BETTER & YOUR CODE highly recommended by the likes of MalwareBytes' HpHosts as I have on YOUR PART? Answer = NOTHING, lol... apk
You admit your router goes down + I answered that lie too (insufficient load & no need vs. hosts - poor "ROI") http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
I am merely pointing out ROUTERSsee 15 posts of mine with 225 examples of insecure routers) & DNS (kaminsky redirect poisoning flaw, dns amp attacks, rogue DNS servers etc.) = SINGLE POINTS OF FAILURE with MASSIVE VULNERABILITIES & you've got ALL YOUR EGGS IN A FAULTY BASKET with LITTLE "ROI" FOR THE EXTRA MONIES OUTLAID + POWER BILLS RAISED also!
APK
P.S.=> If you want to secure your TOYS? Go ahead - but you're depending on a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE with MASSIVE SECURITY ISSUES in BOTH use of DNS & ROUTERS, period... apk
See subject: After all, you LIED that I didn't answer your question first of all http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
& I did LONG ago!
So - How can we trust your ALLEGED DNS uptime (which goes down anyhow which you admitted it HAS to after I forced that truth out of you-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )?
NOW I ASKED YOU A QUESTION YOU AVOID TO NO END (because you KNOW you've created NOTHING YOURSELF that compares to what I've done... lol!)
* I'm also NOT the one DEPENDENT ON A SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE IN A ROUTER or DNS - you are - & ROUTERS + DNS are both HUGELY security issue riddled (of which I proved tons of evidence for & it's NOT EVEN COMPLETE!)
BOTTOM-LINE: You keep on "Bolting on 'MoAr'" ILLOGICALLY costing yourself money in equipment + power costs increasing running it & complexity room for breakdown & EXPLOITS GALORE... me, by way of comparison?
I use what I already natively have in hosts files + firewalls (& the hardware level stateful packet inspecting firewall in my modem also) doing MORE for LESS...
APK
P.S.=> There's NO NONSENSE in the FACT that WHEN YOU RUN MORE HARDWARE or SOFTWARE you use more RAM/CPU, MessagePassing + other forms of I/O, & consume MORE POWER - there is NO WAY AROUND IT, & just physics fact... period!
... apk
See subject & this post of mine that proves it http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
* ESPECIALLY THE CLOSING QUESTION TO HIM THERE IN MY 'P.S.' (which I already KNOW the answer to, but I want to see him "SQUIRM", & ANSWER IT HIMSELF... lol).
APK
P.S.=> Ash-Fox, I know YOU are the "Dude" poster too - so "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!", lol... apk
Opera 12.18 (64-bit too) http://www.bing.com/search?q=o...
* Enjoy!
APK
P.S.=> Has some security update in it iirc... apk