VistaLover Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 51 minutes ago, roytam1 said: I do notice this and reported to upstream Is "upstream" supposed to be https://github.com/rmottola/Arctic-Fox ? I briefly browsed their issue tracker, https://github.com/rmottola/Arctic-Fox/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc but no sign of a mediathekviewweb.de related open issue... Just to be clear, I'm not doubting you in the slightest, I was simply curious to read what they had to say on this... The site itself complains about an "unsupported browser or disabled Javascript", and the Web Console reports "TypeError: n.reconnection is not a function" in https://mediathekviewweb.de/static/socket.io.min.js Incidentally, package palemoon-27.9.7.win32-git-20201121-fa350a3b2-xpmod.7z (buildID=20201120050330) is the last one on which a very useful/favourite GreaseMonkey script works, on later NM27 versions it simply refuses to work at all... The userscript is SaveFromNet: https://en.savefrom.net/user.php?helper=userjs Direct link: https://download.sf-helper.com/chrome/helper.user.js Last good NM27: First bad: Browser Console error on the latter: Regression window: https://github.com/roytam1/palemoon27/compare/fa350a3...b383d6b [Showing 373 changed files with 11,858 additions and 5,748 deletions.] It's hard to pinpoint the culprit commit no doubt, but I and @bernd have great faith in you... FWIW, the same userscript works fine in UXP forks and Vista-usable Chromium forks! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted February 8, 2021 Author Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, VistaLover said: Is "upstream" supposed to be https://github.com/rmottola/Arctic-Fox ? I briefly browsed their issue tracker, https://github.com/rmottola/Arctic-Fox/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc but no sign of a mediathekviewweb.de related open issue... Just to be clear, I'm not doubting you in the slightest, I was simply curious to read what they had to say on this... I got similar issues in KM forum and that it always traced into same rev range: http://kmeleonbrowser.org/forum/read.php?19,145699,154398#msg-154398 I'm surprised that why the problem floating on water right now but not in Nov. EDIT: after some debug, guilty commit is found and workaround is committed, it should be fixed in next build. Edited February 8, 2021 by roytam1 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 14 hours ago, roytam1 said: EDIT: after some debug, guilty commit is found and workaround is committed, it should be fixed in next build. FYI: js: disable Reflect.construct for now to unbreak websites 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPerceniol Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) On 8/24/2020 at 1:05 PM, Sampei.Nihira said: I deleted all the Insecure Cipher Suites. No problem at the moment for the visualization of the websites that I usually frequent. ~continued from Explorere 260 thread~ As I've said there.. I've taken your advice and disabled TLS 1.0 and 1.1: version.fallback_limit "4" https://www.ghacks.net/2018/04/13/mozilla-starts-to-enable-tls-1-3-on-firefox-stable/ version.min "3" version.max "4" [default]) ... and everything looks dandy all but the Insecure Cipher Suites. 0xc00a TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC 0xc014 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC 0x0045 TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_128_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC 0x0088 TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC 0x009d TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 NO PFS 0x002f TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC, NO PFS 0x0041 TLS_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_128_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC, NO PFS 0x0035 TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC, NO PFS 0x003d TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256 CBC, NO PFS 0x0084 TLS_RSA_WITH_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA CBC, SHA-MAC, NO PFS However, I'm uncertain on how to disable them in Serpent52 and NewMoon28. Any advice is much appreciated in advance. Enjoy your Monday everyone Edited February 8, 2021 by XPerceniol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) I had written it in this thread. It's faster if I write it again. About:config ssl (so it's faster) I insert my settings that leave only 1 weak cipher active: P.S. But more important check if at the "Mixed Content Test" (always the same test that I posted in the other thread) the images are NOT blocked. If they are not blocked you must block them. "security.mixed_content.block_display_content" set to true. Edited February 8, 2021 by Sampei.Nihira 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPerceniol Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) Thank you very much @Sampei.Nihira for your help re this. Just did the test and mixed content is indeed blocked \ ~mixed_content.block_content = true `mixed_content.block_object_subrequest = true Edited February 8, 2021 by XPerceniol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Obviously, you need to subsequently verify that the websites you frequent are reachable. Otherwise you have to enable the insecure chiper suites necessary to reach the eventual not working web site. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, XPerceniol said: security.mixed_content.block_content security.mixed_content.block_object_subrequest These prefs are NOT to be found in latest Serpent 52.9.0 BTW... Edited February 8, 2021 by VistaLover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPerceniol Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 OH.. I'm sorry @VistaLover my typing sadly lacking today, I'm afraid, and I didn't write that correctly. security.mixed_content.block But you are right, in that, there is not default pref, as mixed_content.block_object comes up a an empty string now that I reset it? I guess one of my many invalid prefs carried over from that past :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Just curious. Are you guys moving at to any of the new 29x releases? Can this be recompiled for XP/Vista compatibility? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asdf2345 Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 Just now, Jody Thornton said: Just curious. Are you guys moving at to any of the new 29x releases? Can this be recompiled for XP/Vista compatibility? Mypal has 29.x releases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernd Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 16 hours ago, roytam1 said: EDIT: after some debug, guilty commit is found and workaround is committed, it should be fixed in next build. Finally, That's GOOD NEWS!! @VistaLover Thanx a bunch for your great support & assistance in that matter!! BTW, there's another issue that caught my eye: On discogs.com I cannot use the combo box field. E.g. here I cannot operate/select the track combo at the bottom of the track list or hit the "Next" button to show up a complete list. Scripts are all allowed. Any suggestions?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Jody Thornton said: Are you guys moving at to any of the new 29x releases? Can this be recompiled for XP/Vista compatibility? Latest UXP forks by @roytam1 are already being built (as has ALWAYS been the case) on code cherry-picked from the master branch of the official UXP repo, as well as the master branches of official Pale Moon (for NM28) and Basilisk (for St52), so 98% of latest PM 29.0.1/29.1.0a1 and Basilisk 52.9.2021.02.06 is ALREADY there in latest NM28+St52! @Jody Thornton , with respect , you're just being superficial and looking only at version numbers, not actual source code; so get yourself informed (and refrain from possibly spreading misinformation...) . 20 minutes ago, asdf2345 said: Mypal has 29.x releases ... And it has been explained numerous times here that @feodor2 's project (Mypal) forks/follows more closely the RELEASE branch of official PM, so nothing new/surprising there... Edited February 8, 2021 by VistaLover formatting 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) 29 minutes ago, VistaLover said: looking only at version numbers FWIW, the introduction of v29.0+ in official Pale Moon has already caused the malfunctioning of several forks of popular Firefox-exclusive legacy (XUL) extensions, when installed in PM; those extensions have internal code routines that check for appVersion >= 29 and then apply, accordingly, Australis-specific code/features that, of course, are not supported by non-Australis PM29 and, thus, result in a broken extension (partly or completely) ... I won't expect New Moon 28 to forever stay at a 28.x.x version number ( @roytam1 hasn't yet indicated publicly his intentions on this), but, at the moment, staying there avoids nasty surprises from legacy Fx extensions - but may introduce issues with proper PM extensions that demand a minversion of 29.* ... Edited February 8, 2021 by VistaLover 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Thornton Posted February 8, 2021 Share Posted February 8, 2021 (edited) 36 minutes ago, VistaLover said: @Jody Thornton , with respect , you're just being superficial and looking only at version numbers, not actual source code; so get yourself informed (and refrain from possibly spreading misinformation...) . ... And it has been explained numerous times here that @feodor2 's project (Mypal) forks/follows more closely the RELEASE branch of official PM, so nothing new/surprising there... What he heck does that first line mean? I simply asked a question. I don't have time to go through pages of a thread, just to ask a simple question, so sorry about being "superficial". My lord! EDIT: (and yes I saw the smilies, but I abhore the tone of your comment. I don't need to concern myself with differences between source code and "versions". Pale Moon v29 was apparently a milestone release, and I checked the last builds that Roytam1 submitted. I never saw any 29x issues, so I asked. That's NOT spreading misinformation, and I look upon any inference in the slightest to that with major disdain. Edited February 8, 2021 by Jody Thornton 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts