AstroSkipper

Just for clarification! To get information about our TLS proxies does not necessarily mean to read the whole article "ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use". This article is well-structured, comprehensive and up-to-date. It contains all about our TLS proxies and certificates, especially targeting Windows XP. You won't find anything comparable. A lot of my sections can be read separately. And as I already mentioned, browsers have a site search function. And anyone can actually use it these days. Right?

There is no need to do that. I don't want to have a small FAQ. People seeking information should be prepared to read, otherwise they will unfortunately have to be content with trivial knowledge. I am not a friend of the unwillingness to inform oneself comprehensively. In today's youth, it is common practice to get information quickly. But then they don't know anything.

If you want to avoid that, make something short and easy to understand, not Wikipedia (even if it's complete and we have all details, not everyone is able to read all of that and understand, or even choose the right section to get the information they're looking for). Or make a section "Frequently Asked Questions", with the common questions about this. If you want to reply, send me a private message, this is kinda polluting the thread (which does not make the search easy for people who are trying to find a specific post). My post is a complete article containing everything about these proxies. At the beginning, there is a table of contents. And you have a site search in nearly all browsers. If that's not enough, there's unfortunately nothing I can do to help. Those seeking information should be prepared to read, otherwise they will unfortunately have to be content with trivial knowledge. In such a case, however, one should not spread information about such things. You are referring to the TLS 1.2 proxies from @heinoganda and @Thomas S.. These proxies are no longer up-to-date, either. Oh my dear! I gave you the link and the sections. What more do you need to find information? Once again: Here is the link to my article: Have a look at the sections 8. The TLS 1.3 proxy ProxyMII and 9. The TLS 1.3 proxy ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu TLS 1.3! Hope you will find it finally!

For me, very important data, though. I have been dealing with hard drives since the late 1980s. Therefore, I have a lot of experience. Thank you! I am happy, too. Yep! And I will do so as long as my HDDs exist. It helped me a lot in the past as I already mentioned.

And that has been the case since the very beginning!

Where did you see that? Did you do a research first? Unfortunately, you are wrong and not up-to-date. The most recent ProxHTTPSProxy TLS 1.3 1.5.220717 does not require a CPU with SSE2 instruction set anymore, SSE only is sufficient. I thought you read my article "ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use". Have a look at the section 8 and 9: ProxHTTPSProxyM v1.3a is unsecure and only needed in very special situation but definitely not under Windows XP. And BTW, there are big differences between both proxies that is all described in detail in my article. In any case, providing such information is rather misleading and should be avoided.

@WULover! For using the "Restoring WU/MU by using the patch + proxy" method I described in detail long time ago here it is not necessary or recommended to use the old, deprecated ProxHTTPSProxyM v1.3a. The most recent ProxHTTPSProxy TLS 1.3 1.5.220717 works perfectly with MU/WU and is more secure. Cheers, AstroSkipper

It almost seems like you're struggling a bit with the real world and its data. This term appears in many of your sentences. Just a side note! Physics describes the real world perfectly, and I would not close my mind to it. And at the risk of repeating myself here, the strategy of data refreshing is reasonable in any case. Simply using the reason of a healthy, scientifically thinking mind! Anyway! I have explained this clearly enough in the previous posts, so no need here to do that again. S.M.A.R.T. values of HDDs are very interesting, helpful and definitely not meaningless. Of course, nothing can be really perfect, but I observe these values continously on my Windows XP computer using Hard Disk Sentinel Professional which is always running in the background. Reporting or rather alerting important changes of the S.M.A.R.T. values by Hard Disk Sentinel has saved me from data loss several times. And happened in the real world. Observing and evaluating these values led to technical improvements on my computer, which I made myself years ago. And the winner is: the horizontal storage. HDDs should be stored and used horizontally. This also has something to do with physics. In any case, that is what I always did and will do. And I have some real world data confirming this. My HDDs are very old, most of them more than 15 years. And they are working fine and are in a good state of health. On planet earth, no need to protect them from cosmic rays at the moment. But maybe, one day! Whether we (humanity) will still be alive then, or this kind of technology? Who knows! AstroSkipper PS: By the way, I do not believe anything. I am an atheist.

All that said does not mean I refresh my HDDs on a regular base. Sorry, I'm afraid I am too lazy to do that with all my HDDs. But from a physical or technical point of view, refreshing of disks makes perfect sense and can make its contribution as a data preservation strategy. Additionally, checking an HDD in form of data refreshing triggers the controller of such a disk to renew its S.M.A.R.T. values and to decide for example whether pending sectors have to be rated as defective or not. I already did that successfully by using Spinrite in the past. After performing such checks or refreshes, there is a positive side-effect. You will definitely know much more about the health of your disks and the condition of the data on it, including up-to-date S.M.A.R.T. values. AstroSkipper

Good to hear! But we have the theoretical knowledge to understand the instability of magnetic data. In such a case, one can certainly do without such data, even if it would be very welcome. And all this is not a question of belief. It is rather a question of reason. BTW, no one has claimed that data refreshing is a panacea for preserving magnetic information on an HDD. But it is one reasonable strategy, and that is what this thread is about. AstroSkipper

@UCyborg posted further sources in his initial post. And the language in which articles were written doesn't matter nowadays. We all can use Google Translator or much better DeepL And, you will find more scientific or technical information by using Google & Co, of course. Very funny! But to be honest, I actually prefer rather scientific answers. And I say that as an outspoken film lover. AstroSkipper

There is not a single article. The linked articles are just examples to inform users like you. Physics and how magnetism works is evidence enough. And that doesn't have much to do with opinions, either. Simply put, magnetic information can change and unfortunately be lost in its original state, which is simply unavoidable. No matter whether you want to believe that or not. Unfortunately, physics does not take this into account. AstroSkipper

Unfortunately, not! This thread is not about common failures in terms HDDs or SSDs. That's what the topic is about. And you are wrong, unfortunately. There are evidences and physical reasons that the newly written data is better than the previous ones. Read the linked articles and think about magnetism! In terms of HDDs, stored bits can reverse their magnetic polarity, unfortunately. AstroSkipper

Yep! That's riight. And we could list many other strategies for prevention of data loss and disk failures. But this thread is about the periodical refresh of disks to preserve the data on these media as long as possible. And this can be done indeed with tools like DiskFresh, Spinrite and presumably some others. However, the intervals at which something like this should be carried out are quite flexible and rather arbitrary. TBH @D.Draker, that was actually what @UCyborg wanted to discuss here.

There are many different reasons for failures and data loss in terms of HDDs and SSDs. But this thread is about refreshing data on disks. That's why I didn't mention other failures or problems which of course can occur at any time.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. There are indeed physical reasons for losing data. I'll give you a hint. It's called magnetism when it comes to HDDs. But even for SSDs, there are physical processes that can lead to data loss. Here is a German article to bring you a little closer to the subject: https://www.computerwoche.de/a/der-langsame-tod-von-festplatten-und-ssds,3549906 Use a translator if German is not one of your languages! Anyway! @UCyborg's concerns are fully justified and understandable. AstroSkipper

Yep, that's what I said. For transferring all passwords on the same machine and system, the file cert8.db is not absolutely necessary. BTW, I use a Master Password in my old, main NM profile, though. And the file cert9.db still exists, too.

In my main New Moon's profile, all three files key3.db, key4.db and logins.json still exist. The file key4.db was last accessed today. Copying these three files was sufficient for me to transfer all passwords from one profile to another on the same machine, system (Windows XP Professional SP3 fully POSReady updated) and New Moon (28.10.6a1 (32-bit) (2023-04-13) installation. Copying the file cert8.db was not necessary, though. Here are two screenshots, one from my main profile and one from the file properties of key4.db: But you are right, in more recent profiles, the file key4.db doesn't exist anymore. I only listed this file if the profile is an older one like mine. Best regards, AstroSkipper

Anyway! The files containing all passwords and associated data inside your New Moon's profile folder are: key3.db, key4.db (deprecated) and logins.json. Just copying them from one profile to another on the same computer and under the same operation system (and maybe same New Moon installation) works indeed. I already tested that. But copying them from one computer to a different one is supposedly not working, presumably due to encryption problems. I assume the encryption process is hardware- or system-dependent. Therefore, using one of the mentioned password tools in the last three previous posts is most probably the better way in your case.

Another option is PasswordFox from Nirsoft. I have never tried it, but it is supposed to work with all Firefox profiles (and hopefully with all Pale Moon/New Moon profiles, too). Here is a link: https://www.nirsoft.net/utils/passwordfox.html

I use the extension QuickPasswords in addition to KeePass which actually is my main password manager. QuickPasswords offers a backup & restore feature. Here is a link: https://addons.palemoon.org/addon/quickpasswords/

Spinrite is a good tool for checking and refreshing old HDDs, presumably with a lower size. I don't know if there are any size restrictions. I already used Spinrite 6.0 in the past, and it helped me to refresh an old HDD and check a few pending sectors on it. The tool DiskFresh also sounds promising, though.

Okay! No separate dom.getRootNode.enabled preference anymore! Sometimes, it is really a good idea to read the official UXP changes.

Autoruns is one of the rare tools to get a complete list of all important entries in terms of autostart programs, services, drivers, tasks, handlers, codecs and so on, sorted by categories. To be honest, I never felt the need to remove such entries shown in your screenshot. Any regular entries will stay in my system as they are. For me, Autoruns is a perfect tool in finding remnants of already uninstalled programs or services. I use it regularly for this purpose and for additional control.

I also used to use Autoruns 13.98 as my main start-up manager. Nowadays, I only use it to get an overview of all entries of programs, services and drivers that are started when booting, and to delete obsolete remnants. If someone is still interested in StartupCPL, here is a link to its no longer existing homepage using the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20131106030702/http://www.mlin.net/StartupCPL.shtml The download from there was tested by me and works.