Problems with last Firefox update?

[rcperryls]

I'm posting this for Karen, since she is now limited to using her Kindle to get on to the forum since updating her version of Firefox. I haven't restarted my version so I haven't run into this problem yet, but have in the past. Firefox seems to decide periodically that our forum doesn't meet all of its security requirements and so won't let you sign in. Took it a few days to iron this out for me on this forum and a few others. I ended up having to use Safari for a while. So, if you don't have a second browser on your computer (I have several available, but pretty much stick with Firefox and use Safari as my backup) its not a bad idea to think of downloading another one. I am far from being a computer wiz, but know that a lot of people use Chrome these days and Opera used to get good reviews, but I know almost nothing about either of these and I don't have a clue about IE or the newer microsoft browser. I'm going to be brave and upgrade my Firefox now and will let you know the results.

Hope I explained this right, Karen. Feel free to jump in with your Kindle if you want to correct any of what I just reported.

Carole

[rcperryls]

I just logged out and logged back in without any problems after updating. I did notice that under the user name box, a warning came up that this isn't a secure site, but I basically ignored it and logged in as usual. Did you try that Karen? and anyone else who updates?

Carole

[karen4bells]

I will go ahead and proceed then, Carole. I am sure I will be able to do what you have done, just never had that issue arise before! It is a lot easier to post via a PC, vs. using my kindle---but I am getting better!! Practice makes somewhat perfect

[fiddler]

I had this problem when I put the photos of rags to riches on yesterday. I noticed when I sighed in it said it was not secure. Had the same problem with photobucket.

[karen4bells]

Well, I have decided to go ahead and sign in via my PC---thank goodness, I didn't get any additional alerts/warnings from my antivirus program etc. So far so good, just hoping it gets resolved soon

[Allyn]

I use Waterfox (a 64-bit version of Firefox) for my work browser. It's been telling me for a while now that just about every site I go to is not secure. I've been ignoring the message and opening/logging-in anyway. It hasn't prevented me from logging into anything, so I don't know if it is the same thing as you are experiencing. I have four browsers loaded -- IE, Chrome, Waterfox, and Opera -- and I use all them each day for different things (ie: if I need to stream video, I use Chrome because it seems to handle it best of my browsers; I use Waterfox and Opera to log into Google Docs because I need to have two different log-ins into Google Docs at the same time and I can't do that with one browser). I do all my personal forum activity in IE, so I can't speak to how this forum behaves in Firefox.

[wendywombat]

I reported this a while back too. Still get the same message but now I ignore it. I did use Chrome for a while but as it was only used on this site I gave that up.
I did tell Alex and he said that he would wait and see if anyone else reported the same problem to him.

My D/H said that Firefox had added extra security on the log-in needing https:// instead of http:// in front of the www. but when I tried that it still didn't work as it would have to be changed by the site admin.

Hohum, the wonders of technology eh?

[richardandtracy]

There is a big move going on to migrate all sites to the 'https://' protocol. This is supposedly more secure and reduces the chance of interception of data as all the packets sent over the internet are encrypted. It has two problems, though.

1. The first is that it triples the amount of data sent. Before encryption, you were sent one packet & your computer displayed it. When using encryption, the server sends you an encrypted packet. Your computer then puts your encryption on the packet and sends it back to the server. The server then removes its encryption, and sends the packet back to you with only your encryption. Finally, your computer removes your encryption and displays the content of the packet. In some ways it can be likened to having a suitcase, where the sender puts their padlock on it, when it gets to you, you put your own padlock on it and send it back. Then the sender removes their padlock, and sends the suitcase to you again, where you remove your padlock & find out what is in the case. That way the suitcase can be sent securely without you having a key that fits the sender's padlock, or vice versa. This process obviously takes much longer than it used to.
2. The second disadvantage is that if someone intercepts all three packets, they can overlay each packet to find the encryption at both ends and read the data too (three unknowns & three equations, anyone who has done simple algebra knows that is soluble). So, it is not as secure as everyone thinks. The probability of intercepting all three packets is thought to be low. At the moment. But that may change.

In the case of data to/from this site with no commercial/security implications, I think the idea of encryption is overkill. It may be useful to do it with the login info, but if an account here gets hijacked, it is unlikely to have more serious implications than 'Extremely Irritating'. It shouldn't cost anyone money or state secrets. I remain relatively sanguine about it.

Regards,

Richard.

[Mabel Figworthy]

I'm not too happy about this https hype - it makes any site that does not have it (like a lot of hobby sites or one-man-business sites) look as though they are suddenly unsafe, which is of course not true. I tried to apply it to our own websites (both the main business and Mabel) but it clashed with some of the coding and caused an awful lot of trouble.

Richard, thank you for your suitcase explanation, that has made it very clear!