 Grail KnightQui audet adipisciturPremium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6
 ·Time Warner Cable
| reply to Mele20
Re: Thoughts / Warnings On Bookmark Checking And Re-directs You do a lot of guessing for me Mele.
This is not the first time. hmmmm
Provide me solid proof about Mozillas intentions. Your accusing them of putting money before security and privacy. Surely you have something to back that up other then telling me it is right there for me to see.
I see a quality browser that has features I like. If they make money along the way that is called a business. Judging from users comments at MozillaZine they like them also.
No Mele it is not all about me. Seems though you are familair with the term Has someone said that to you before bsides me?
Go play your games Somewhere else I am not biting tonight.
I have read up on the features today and I had them mixed up at first. Whoops, end of the world moment there.
So you do not make mistakes now do you?
How is your web bug identification coming?
quote:
Why don't you address the issues for a change?
Ha Ha that is the pot calling the kettle black.
I addressed your issues and you did not like what you heard. Go find the proof Mozilla is ditching lowering security and privacy for money. Hard to find links on that when they do not exist.
If you look at my posts I have recommended other users contact the developers to let them know about problems.
Hmmm maybe you did not look through my past posts good enough.
Once again have a great evening.
--
When the going gets tough the tough stop posting.
|
|
DaifnePremium
join:2006-08-04
Milwaukee, WI | reply to forgot
quote:
I just came across this thread and can you believe over at Mozillazine the moderators are actually threatening anybody that mentions this subject. Seems they don't like people noticing that Mozilla is becoming as intrusive as Microsoft.
As one of the Moderators from Mozillazine involved in the topic and the first one to post there, the "threats" were not because of the subject being discussed but for the nastiness in the way it was posted. Name calling and nastiness are not allowed on Mozillazine and will be disciplined. This is not a threat, but a given. Break the rules and you will be gone. To reiterate, this had absolutely nothing to do with discussing this subject and everything to do with the manner in which it was presented. |
|
| You beat me to the punch, Daifne. Well put. |
|
4 edits | reply to Daifne
said by Daifne: quote:
I just came across this thread and can you believe over at Mozillazine the moderators are actually threatening anybody that mentions this subject. Seems they don't like people noticing that Mozilla is becoming as intrusive as Microsoft.
As one of the Moderators from Mozillazine involved in the topic and the first one to post there, the "threats" were not because of the subject being discussed but for the nastiness in the way it was posted. Name calling and nastiness are not allowed on Mozillazine and will be disciplined. This is not a threat, but a given. Break the rules and you will be gone. To reiterate, this had absolutely nothing to do with discussing this subject and everything to do with the manner in which it was presented. Thanks for dropping by.
Can you point me to the exact thread where the Mozillazine discussion is occurring? I haven't had much time since my last post to do any follow-up here or anywhere else.
Thank you.
Edit:
Let me know if I should bring my headgear and gloves. 
Edit 2:
Nevermind, I found it. The content of the thread is not constructive at all, but if anyone wants to see it, here it is (it has been locked):
»forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic···0469ea7d
While the whole thread was disappointing, I would like to correct a statement made by a Mozillazine moderator:
said by Cusser: Mozillazine Mod :
Personally, I don't see how this is an invasion of privacy. Firefox doesn't send any information other than the usual headers when you visit a bookmarked page - it's just retrieving information to let you decide if you want to use Live Titles or not.
On the contrary, Live Titles functionality identifies itself to the remote server via a unique-to-Mozilla HTTP header (X-Moz: Microsummary). The header has been discussed and it is the identifier that the Proxomitron filter uses to determine which outbound connection attempts should be killed. |
|
DaifnePremium
join:2006-08-04
Milwaukee, WI | Thanks jimfitter. Good to see you here. 
BandHeight, I should have posted that link. Sorry. Glad you found it. Yes, it was very unconstructive and woodstock69 was getting very nasty.
I'll let Cusser defend himself. |
|
Mele20Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:4 | I don't believe I was nasty. I didn't even see the original nasty comments by woodstock69 as those were removed by the time I got back there. I didn't know the thread was locked either. I learned that here and went to read it just now.
I didn't get any of my questions, which were quite legitimate, answered. Wonder why? I also don't understand the extremely thin skin of many "regulars" there regarding ANY criticism of Fx. I love Fx...1.5 that is and have used it as my default browser for over five years. I feel that questions and criticism should be viewed in a positive manner yet frequently at Mozillazine that is very far from reality. There is so much posturing by a few regulars there (as happens in the Mozilla forum here also to a lesser extent) that one gets the impression that only positive things can be said there in regards to Fx and the Mozilla Foundation. It is a shame because I think there should be some interesting, serious discussions minus the posturing. That would be of benefit to all.
I asked good questions and got no answers other than several ad hominem attacks simply because those users hate personal privacy and can't see why anyone would want to protect their privacy. These are the users that think 1984 is the greatest thing since chocolate.
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions"
»www.msfirefox.com/ |
|
 hpguruCurb Your DogmaPremium
join:2002-04-12 | reply to BandHeight
said by BandHeight:The content of the thread is not constructive at all, but if anyone wants to see it, here it is (it has been locked): » forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic···0469ea7dWhile the whole thread was disappointing, I would like to correct a statement made by a Mozillazine moderator: said by Cusser: Mozillazine Mod :
Personally, I don't see how this is an invasion of privacy. Firefox doesn't send any information other than the usual headers when you visit a bookmarked page - it's just retrieving information to let you decide if you want to use Live Titles or not.
On the contrary, Live Titles functionality identifies itself to the remote server via a unique-to-Mozilla HTTP header (X-Moz: Microsummary). The header has been discussed and it is the identifier that the Proxomitron filter uses to determine which outbound connection attempts should be killed. It is pretty obvious the Mozillazine moderators aren't interested in honest and open discussion when it casts FireFrog in a bad light. This Microsummary gimmick may or may not represent a serious privacy threat but I think the mods at Mozillazine would do well to be a little more sensitive since nothing riles folks up quite so much as software doing things behind their backs without asking and without providing any means of disabling the "feature" which is exactly what this silly gimmick does.
My own thoughts regarding this gimmick is that it does not represent a serious threat to privacy at this time but the FireFroggers should have provided a means to disable it and to disable it by default for users like myself who see it for the foolish gimmick that it is. Also, as I mentioned above, I have a hunch there may be a potential vulnerability lurking here. I haven't had time to play with that however.
--
Where's Jesus?
Dear Jesus! |
|
| The Mozillazine moderators aren't interested in placating known troublemakers such as Scarlettrunner20. His posting history demonstrates his ignorance and inability to listen to reason.
Sending a unique x-moz header is hardly a privacy issue, and suggestions of potential vulnerabilities certainly aren't warranted. There hasn't been any evidence provided which shows this is a privacy issue. |
|
hpguruCurb Your DogmaPremium
join:2002-04-12 | said by Angus1 :
The Mozillazine moderators aren't interested in placating known troublemakers such as (snip)
I really don't think it is appropriate for you to come here naming and labeling people as troublemakers.
--
Where's Jesus?
Dear Jesus! |
|
| reply to BandHeight
Hey, wait a second! As woodstock69 on Mozillazine, I don't want scarlettrunner20 (Mele20) stealing my thunder. Mele is a super nice guy compared to me. And just to be absolutely clear, I mean I will ask the questions others are afraid to due to the ridicule and derisive remarks made by the Mozillazine lackeys. Can you believe they are so technically challenged that they attempted to ban me last year. Now we all know the site would have to be closed down to accomplish that. I sure wish I could remember what I signed up as here 3 years ago! |
|
