Jump to content

VistaLover

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,245

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    93

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    Greece

 Content Type 

Everything posted by VistaLover

  1. VistaLover
    ... "They" seem to have moved your post to its own standalone thread now: https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/296406-windows-xp-does-not-have-lifetime-support/ You should probably edit that first post, to include a link to the originating thread, so it doesn't look out of place on its own ; truth be told, I don't think you can achieve much there, except for venting a bit ...
  2. VistaLover
    ... Many thanks for testing this ; so, it proves it can still successfully update its definitions, the same way as on WinXP ... But this finding of yours contradicts with the linked discussion in the MB Support Forum ; not that sterling of a "support", is it? I bet no-one there actually tried that "legacy" 3.5.1 version on either XP/Vista - yet, they were quick to disseminate what they were probably trained to say: "Every WinOS below Win10 is a security menace" (and what I found particularly distasteful was their suggestion below: ; I'm not a native English speaker, but, surely, "by crook" doesn't imply pirated versions, does it? ) ...
  3. VistaLover
    XP (and Vista) users should really keep an eye on that thread ; things look grim ... The opening post there displays a picture of what Dave described in a previous post here: However, this time the MB staff aren't interested in "resolving it"; according to the reporter (and confirmed by a staff member), Malwarebytes Premium Legacy 3.5.1.2522 can no longer receive def updates under Vista/Win7 - thanks to user feedback in this thread, we do know XP installations still receive these ; but all the MB staff can, apparently, do is endlessly recite ad nauseam the "inherent perils of running Microsoft unsupported Windows versions like XP/Vista ; as per @lmacri's post 3hr ago, MB staff have started wiping out Forum references to "Malwarebytes support for legacy Windows XP and Vista Operating Systems"; what comes next ? OT: @mina7601; Since you seem to have a Vista SP2 VM installed, could you be so kind as to try MB Legacy 3.5.1.2522 there and check whether its defs can be updated? Thanks in advance ...
  4. VistaLover
    ... Yes, I've been following this in the upstream repos ; it's part of their struggle to split large DLL files (e.g. xul.dll and icudt63l.dat) inside the platform/application core into smaller ones... A propos, I want to ask you a relevant question: Issue #61 - Reinstate buildability with shared gkmedias dll Issue #61 - Place Skia in libxul Unlike the platform's default setting (and the obvious selection on WinXP), under Vista SP2 32-bit I prefer content to be rendered by skia, not cairo, thus I have the below user-set pref: gfx.content.azure.backends;direct2d1.1,skia,cairo (FWIW, "direct2d1.1" requires Win7+); does this new "moving around" by upstream still allow my current setting, or will it break once skia has been moved out of xul.dll? Upstream say they're only using skia "for canvas anyway", so they're probably not checking scenarios where skia is used for content, too... Any additional insight will be highly appreciated ...
  5. VistaLover
    Hi Nico ; I run St52 as my daily driver basically, "File upload" via the VT modern GUI works fine here in my "dirty" profile: I then launched latest NM28 in an almost fresh profile (no extensions, only slight GUI customisation ), and "File upload" via the VT modern GUI also works as expected there: So I believe it's something in your current NM28 configuration that prevents the VT File upload from functioning as expected ... Kindest regards
  6. VistaLover
    ... Noted and original post of mine edited accordingly... It was just the level of your coding expertise that probably made me think you're coding for a living ... This thread (and the forums in general) needs more "coding-apt" members, beyond the "average mass" of just "browser users", of which mass I, too, constitute a part ... Hence, your erudite contributions are always welcome here ...
  7. VistaLover
    ... Dear Astroskipper , my true goal was not to prove you were wrong, especially on such a trivial matter, what good would that do in the broader scheme of things? It was more a proof to myself actually , because (I thought) I had a very vivid recollection of your post in question... As I wrote recently, "I may be wrong as much as anybody else", and I have been wrong in the past, and, no doubt, I'll be wrong again in the future - it's human nature, of course, to be wrong sometimes ("errare humanum est"), more so as age progresses , and it's something I deal with constantly in real life; errors/misjudgments committed either by me or my immediate circle (of relatives/friends, etc.); as long as someone else, preferably impartial, exists to point us towards the "right", we should learn from our mistakes, philosophise a bit and move on ... But I'm going off-topic... Cheers
  8. VistaLover
    No worries here, too ; but I can assure you it did not contain that screenshot "when it went live the first time"; as I've posted in the past in this thread, I'm subscribed to this thread and have the MSFN forum software configured in such a way so as to send me e-mail notifications whenever new posts are being published in this thread - the software sends an initial e-mail ONLY when a post goes first "live", later edits by a post's author do not trigger further e-mail notifications ; thus, I have to visit the thread through my browser to become aware of additional in-same-post content... FTR, below is a screenshot of your post the very first time it went live, as it appeared inside my e-mail client: That e-mail was received at 202303280017GMT; and I'm extremely lucky, dare I say , that Bing's cache has saved your initial post just two minutes after it went live, https://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=https%3a%2f%2fmsfn.org%2fboard%2ftopic%2f184051-my-browser-builds-part-4%2fpage%2f74&d=3263078889977&mkt=en-WW&setlang=en-US&w=ur8pG3tLReOOvMj2Ov9a9kvf_SOCrEvI and it indeed first appeared without an image attachment: "Case closed" for me ... As ever, best wishes!
  9. VistaLover
    ... Well, I commented very shortly after your own post went "live" , then put the laptop to "Sleep" and went myself to bed ; when I first read your post and composed my own comment/reply to it, your post hadn't been edited yet, no screenshot had been attached at that time ...
  10. VistaLover
    ... Did you remember to also toggle "dom.getRootNode.enabled" to "true"? These prefs are actually a "wedded couple", so to speak - if one is set to true, the other has to be set to true, too - and vice versa ... ... FWIW, both I and @UCyborg mentioned, here in this thread, it's not the case ; my own advice came after the recommendation issued by upstream not to simultaneously enable both (i.e. palefill+nativeWC): UCyborg (a "hobbyist" coder, BTW by profession ) later posted additional input: ... He specifically cites GitHub above, but palefill does also include code pertaining to VirusTotal, e.g.: https://github.com/martok/palefill/commit/657b2b1 https://github.com/martok/palefill/commit/6001e31 Kind regards
  11. VistaLover
    Thanks to extensive coding work carried out by upstream developer FranklinDM, "Web Components Slots" are now supported in UXP natively ; last Saturday's UXP-builds by Roy come with that support backported ; as such, now the "modern GUI" version of VirusTotal can be successfully rendered and used in NM28/St52 without disabling the native WC implementation and without excessive CPU consumption (YMMV, here it was OK ) : https://www.virustotal.com/gui/home/upload
  12. VistaLover
    I have been running last Saturday's St52 (32-bit) build (BuildID=20230324153850) for a whole 3 days now and can confirm that the "xul.dll" crashes I first spoke of here no longer happen ; so it was indeed Bugzilla #1440809 (landing first on Fx60) that had to be applied to "our" UXP tree to get those crashes fixed... Many thanks (FWIW, don't "upstream" also need this fix, or is it specifically tied to WebExtensions ? ). Speaking of "xul.dll" crashes, another type of them (see #2176) was addressed by upstream in PR #2178, that fix has already been transferred to "our' tree and will be included in the next UXP-based releases (Sat, Apr 1st 2023) .
  13. VistaLover
    If one site hosts multiple domains, the certificate will typically include a Subject Alternative Name for each domain hosted at that site. As long as the domain you're accessing is one of the certificate's SANs, the browser shouldn't give a warning. But if the domain isn't listed as a SAN, a warning should appear. @luweitest : Mathwiz is right ; below is a capture of the "SAN field" of the server certificate on "forums.internetfreedom.org":
  14. VistaLover
    Sounds to me like another genius move by Micro$oft: make sure even fewer folks use Bing! ... It's actually their new "offspring", OpenAI-based, supposed to be "more powerful" than ChatGPT: https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/02/07/reinventing-search-with-a-new-ai-powered-microsoft-bing-and-edge-your-copilot-for-the-web/ ... And Roy's choice is: https://github.com/roytam1/basilisk55/commit/babf7e8e5c79cab7ea504f16fab609253e047ce8 => https://msfn.org/board/forum/201-browsers-working-on-older-nt-family-oses/ Quite right ; at that time, Fx did support both XUL+WE extensions, and while WE are inherently e10s-compatible, not all XUL ones had been rewritten to support it; their authors became less "enthused" (to put it mildly ) when Mozilla announced XUL support would be axed in "Quantum" (Fx57+) ... Being on Vista SP2 x86 myself, e10s is enabled in my Fx-52.9.1 (32-bit) "nostalgia/test" copy, however I don't use nor recommend myself e10s on St52/St55; the platforms (UXP Take 2 / UXP Take 1 = moebius) were significantly modified by upstream compared to their respective Mozilla forkpoints (52.6.0/53.0a1), not taking at all the underlying (but dormant) multiprocess support code into account; as posted already by others, that support was later excised completely from the "official" UXP code; "we" have kept these e10s vestiges inside "our" UXP tree, but no-one upstream (of course) or downstream (Roy) checks how well/bad these vestiges behave now, when enabled, with current UXP platform snapshots; St52 has also kept vestigial support for Fx52-level "Container Tabs" (off by default) and WEs, but, like e10s, those platform features, no longer present in official Basilisk, aren't being maintained at all by Roy... All these extra features are in a "Use at your own risk" status; for e10s specifically, you should definitely back up your profile (to have a single process one to revert to if/when things turn sour ) before enabling it, and making frequent profile backups once on e10s isn't a bad idea either ... To give credit to people requesting e10s in their browsers, it's mostly due to the way website design has grown to become over the last years : the major league of browsers, Chromium-based ones and Firefox, have, since long ago,, native multiprocess support, and it's those browsers that are being targeted by web devs and web frameworks; this has resulted in the current web abomination where every independent browser tab runs a "web app", downloading tens of MiBs of JS code that has to be rendered locally by the browser's engine; this is especially true on "popular" social media portals (facebook, instagram, twitter, etc.) and "chat" apps (e.g. Discord), exacerbated by the concurrent use of a multitude of rich media (HD images/GIFs, HD video, audio, WebRTC video+audio, etc) ... While single process engines were "fine" a decade or more ago, they're more likely to "run out of O2 and choke to death" when asked to deal with the modern web, especially on our older H/W and OSes - but do also note that e10s works best on more recent H/W, where ample RAM and CPU is being made available to the multiprocess-enabled browser core ...
  15. VistaLover
    ... I can also confirm that statement : accessing it from Southern Europe; I'm not familiar with that site, but is the server/hostname "forums.internetfreedom.org" located outside of the GFW (I assume so, because. err, "internetfreedom" is non-existent inside mainland China ) ? Since St52 has its own certificate store, XP's deficient OS CA store shouldn't matter in this case... Does the GFW block access to "fankui.dongtaiwang.net" issued server certs ? (and I see the "taiwan" string in that hostname, so it's more than probable ) ; here's a screengrab of the certs chain when validating the site's certificate: Are you able to VPN/tunnel your way out the GFW and reach that site securely? if yes, you could export the server cert (expires on June 6th 2023) and import it to St52's cert store for the duration it's valid... Have you checked whether the site loads securely on a fresh St52 profile? Have you also tried unselecting the option "Query OCSP responder servers to confirm the current validity of certificates" in "about:preferences#advanced -> Certificates" ? If you can browse SO/SU and similar sites, you'll see that solutions downgrading HTTPS to plain HTTP are not desirable and, hence, very difficult to come across (and your particular use-case is indeed a niche one) ...
  16. VistaLover
    aka Serpent 55; lethal toxicity on the official Pale Moon and/or Basilisk forums aside, I believe the very reason this: https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=237897#p237897 "happened" in the first place is the existence of below about:config pref in St55: app.feedback.baseURL;https://forum.palemoon.org/viewforum.php?f=61 that controls where "Help -> "Submit Feedback..." will take the St55 user who wishes to, well , submit feedback (e.g. a bug) specific to that browser... Obviously now , the value of that pref has to change... FWIW, @pdemal isn't a username directly associated with a MSFN forum member (ofc, one may use different usernames "there" and "here" , ), but by now (and especially ever since the infamous M.A.T. "era" ), 99.9% of MSFN members do know that "forum.palemoon.org" is NOT the place to register in order to seek support for any application that launches under XP (and... Vista ) ...
  17. VistaLover
    Currently (202303242345Z), both those links return a "404 Not Found" ...
  18. VistaLover
    ... When/where did I actually said that? If on Vista SP2, go and install: ... You can't update the VS2022 runtime past v14.32.31332.0 (that's contained inside the linked AIO package), but all apps requiring VS2015-2022 runtimes should continue to work as expected with that EoS version...
  19. VistaLover
    @Rod Steel and, possibly, many others : Please be kind enough to check below FAQ: i.e. TL;DR: If a certain "feature" (Web Compatibility-related, or otherwise) has made it onto an official Pale Moon (and/or Basilisk) "proper" release, then, in all probability, it's already extant in the Roytam1 UXP-forks preceding those "official" releases ... Notable exceptions: a) The "feature" breaks < Win7 compatibility in "our" forks, hence hasn't been included ... b) (related to "a)" in an indirect way:) The "feature" is currently incompatible with the compiler used to build the forks c) "Upstream" have updated their source code (platform and/or application) on a day after Saturday and have rushed a new binary release immediately after, before coming Saturday's scheduled releases by Roytam1 ; in that last, rare, case, wait for a few more days until the Roytam1 releases have been published in the known "outlets" ... And that concludes it, I hope ... Best wishes to all!
  20. VistaLover
    ... Where the exact same changelogs (as the ones posted here) are also printed just below the download links ... This has been conveyed/explained time and again: ALL major development, both upstream and here, takes place at the platform level (i.e. UXP) Upstream (platform): https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/commits/branch/master Upstream (application=Pale Moon) https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon/commits/branch/master Upstream (application=Basilisk) https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/commits/branch/master Roytam1 (custom branch - consists of cherry-picked development commits from upstream UXP+PM+Bk) https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/commits/custom I agree that most of the committed code is in "developer's speak", but if you make it a habit of quickly browsing over it every Saturday, you start understanding more as time goes on - in any case, "Enable WebComponents by default in the platform." is human-readable enough, isn't it... Upstream make official monthly releases, with announcements in their Forum, https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&p=237830&#p237830 in their application code repo: https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon/releases/tag/32.1.0_Release as well as in a dedicated Releases page in the PM site: https://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes.shtml OTOH, the development model of roytam1 is akin to a "nightly" release channel, with a weekly frequency of binary distributions - these are not tagged/"official" Roy releases, just "unstable/weekly" ones; the "norm" in such cases is to provide changelogs in the form of git-compare, e.g. : https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/compare/6f99b97...85f6a49 lists the source code changes between the latest UXP builds (by Roy) and the ones he released some 10 days ago... It's the way it has been for years... Of course I can be wrong, as much as anyone can ... And I'm not in the habit of "lying to myself", or to others, for that matter... In fact, being past 50 has taught me that it's telling the truth to others that will get me to trouble more often than not... I'm simply volunteering here, my free time is as precious as yours or anyone else's inside this community... Roy's making the hardest sacrifice to keep our old H/W and OSes usable by providing his browsers, I consider it a form of payback (to him) to occasionally offer "my services" here, with the deep knowledge I'm not "pleasant" to ALL readers... Best regards...
  21. VistaLover
    And my question is: Where have you been? Upstream's native WC implementation has been backported to UXP-based browsers by roytam1 (these, of course, include New Moon 28 - but NOT NM27) since the builds released on the first weekend of March: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184051-my-browser-builds-part-4/page/55/#comment-1239941 ... Roy spends considerable free time composing and putting up those Release Notes every Saturday but it appears, in practice, they go totally unnoticed by the majority of users here ; and it's a pity, TBH ... TL;DR: Grab yourself last Saturday's NM28 build and you'll see "what you really want to see"; BTW, since the native WC implementation is still being perfected, don't forget to update to the future NM28 releases as they become available ...
  22. VistaLover
    ... AFAIAA, you need install neither (for simple tasks), because, if you're on a very recent and powerful browser (e.g. ChrEdge x64), you can do most GitHub stuff on-line, via their native on-line File Editor - also, you can try their "New Code Search and Code View" feature: (not 100% compatible with latest UXP, but mostly works ), which can also take you to their "new", powerful, repo managing tool (aka "Web Editor") served from "github.dev" (this is NOT compatible with UXP, as it uses the "??=" operator ): https://github.dev/UCyborg/palefill/blob/master/bootstrap.js Thanks ...
  23. VistaLover
    @msfntor Thanks for your replies and provided links therein ; 90% of the info is known to me, another 5% had by now faded in memory ... However, and perhaps my wording was a bit off , what do the Chase.com IT staff expect from one of their web-banking customers? Should one use a completely fresh browser profile, devoid of any browser extension, when logging into this bank? Of course they can, probably, tell when extensions are installed in the customer's browser (which should be true in most instances), but do they outright forbid access when they detect "third party" extensions? And what do they mean by "third party" as opposed to "first party" ones (and which "first party" ones they do support, and what does that really mean)? Hence my original question:
  24. VistaLover
    ... While following the link posted by @gerwin above, I ended up loading below article: https://www.winhelponline.com/blog/disable-full-row-select-explorer-windows-7/ I was (and still am now) on latest Serpent 52.9.0, but, to my dismay , I regrettably found out that images in this article aren't being displayed AT ALL in St52 ; I had to launch a Chromium variant (360EEv12) to be able to see the images, which constitute an important part of the article... Is this a known "Google-ism" that UXP currently lacks? St52's Web Console has a "ReferenceError" and a "SyntaxError" in red lines: ReferenceError: event is not defined[Learn More] https://www.winhelponline.com/blog/disable-full-row-select-explorer-windows-7:167:213 SyntaxError: bad method definition https://www.winhelponline.com/detroitchicago/cmbv2.js:197:336 "Fixes" are gladly welcome ...
  25. VistaLover
    ... Probably enabling the (mostly "fixed" ) native WC+SR support in St52 (and backported to St55) is what allowed you to sign-in suuccessfully to Chase.com using St55... Fx 98 and Chrome 95, actually ... Latest St52 comes with a built-in SSUAO for chase.com: general.useragent.override.chase.com;Mozilla/5.0 (%OS_SLICE% rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/79.0 I'd suggest changing it to general.useragent.override.chase.com;Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/102.0 where 102.0 is current FxESR and chase.com don't allow anything older than Win7 ... Should at least rid you of the "Please update your browser" ribbons, until the "real" breakage takes place... (FWIW, their sign-in page is served from "secureXXea.chase.com", but the SSUAO takes care of that, too...)
×
×
  • Create New...