AstroSkipper Posted April 17, 2023 Share Posted April 17, 2023 (edited) 52 minutes ago, VistaLover said: Actually, UXP-based browsers are no longer using the key4.db file; they did for some brief period maybe two years ago, but the files associated with password storage are now cert8.db, key3.db and logins.json 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 Edited April 17, 2023 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted April 17, 2023 Share Posted April 17, 2023 (edited) ... I've been wrong about file cert8.db, which seems to contain NSS security certificates; but I've always known that itself and key3.db file are interlinked (the same is true for key4.db+cert9.db used in recent Firefox versions). key3.db is indeed the file that stores the password decryption key in UXP-based browsers; logins.json is the one that stores the encryptred credentials (this format was first implemented in Fx32+, previously other formats/filenames were used: signons.txt, signons2.txt, signons3.txt, signons.sqlite; all these, plus logins.json, require key3.db to work). https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1210914 Quote The passwords stored in logins.json are encrypted, but the encryption key is stored in key4.db (previously in key3.db) and without a master password you merely need to place the two files in Firefox profile folder to see the passwords in the Password Manager. The usernames and passwords are encrypted with triple-DES stored in the key file, but the master password adds an extra layer. I've never used one myself, but it's the implementation of a Master Password by the user that will make it impossible to transfer stored account credentials to a different machine... http://kb.mozillazine.org/Master_password As for key4.db, I'm adamant it's NOT currently used in UXP-based browsers; my dirty St52 profile does NOT contain it, my dirty St55 profile does NOT contain it, my semi-fresh NM28 profile does NOT contain it! As a further test, I just launched a pristine/fresh NM28 profile [version is 28.10.6a1 (32-bit) (2023-04-13)]; that fresh profile only contains a key3.db (& cert8.db) file, NO SIGN of a key4.db one... If I then store a single account there (e.g., my MSFN forum credentials), no sign, again, of a further key*.db file: Transferring just key3.db+logins.json from my St52 dirty profile to the NM28 "fresh" one was sufficient here to migrate all my accounts... Edited April 17, 2023 by VistaLover 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted April 17, 2023 Share Posted April 17, 2023 9 minutes ago, VistaLover said: ... I've been wrong about file cert8.db, which seems to contain NSS security certificates ... Transferring just key3.db+logins.json from my St52 dirty profile to the NM28 "fresh" one was sufficient here to migrate all my accounts... 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. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted April 17, 2023 Share Posted April 17, 2023 2 hours ago, VistaLover said: so am not sure what they have later implemented with regards to profile migration between different machines ... The process is still the same. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird Posted April 17, 2023 Share Posted April 17, 2023 Serpent (2023/04/13) does not work properly with eBay. Bidding or sending offers is no longer possible. There's also still a less serious but nevertheless long-standing issue with the watchlist page on eBay: https://www.ebay.com/mye/myebay/watchlist Serpent incorrectly renders the iframe horizontally which necessitates scrolling from left to right. Thanks 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted April 18, 2023 Share Posted April 18, 2023 On 4/10/2023 at 9:12 AM, cmccaff1 said: (It now seems to truly support nullish coalescing/optional chaining without needing to install palefill, which is fantastic!) ... This has been covered previously, but both "??" and "?." are operators and operators can not be polyfilled (what palefill strives to achieve with UXP-incompatible JS code), only transpiled... Palefill itself won't work fully/at all on sites that demand such operators, unless the application platform (UXP in this case) carries native support for said operators... UXP has had native support for "??" and "?." since many months ago: "?.": May 2022, "??": June 2022, the fact you can now use, e.g., GitHub without palefill is largely due to Web Components support (finally) landing... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmccaff1 Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 6 hours ago, VistaLover said: ... This has been covered previously, but both "??" and "?." are operators and operators can not be polyfilled (what palefill strives to achieve with UXP-incompatible JS code), only transpiled... Palefill itself won't work fully/at all on sites that demand such operators, unless the application platform (UXP in this case) carries native support for said operators... UXP has had native support for "??" and "?." since many months ago: "?.": May 2022, "??": June 2022, the fact you can now use, e.g., GitHub without palefill is largely due to Web Components support (finally) landing... Oh! That explains a lot...it is good to finally have Web Components support. I did learn recently about UXP gaining support for this, but didn't realize it directly affects the ability to use GitHub without Palefill. Thank you for the explanation! (And thanks for not making me feel like an id*** about it...) I would like and do want to learn more about JavaScript, operators, etc. Though I fall into the category of your typical user (as opposed to a programmer/contributor), I don't want to be totally ignorant of how everything works...honestly, it's just amazing to go back to NM28 and see all the changes that have been made as of late. I'm finding NM28 is still very good and reliable as a 'base' browser...and for the sites that have issues in it, I'm glad there are other alternative browsers, like 360 and Mypal68, to use as well. Roy has definitely made a tremendous effort over the years with his browser forks. I am always excited to try a new release, even if there's the occasional bug...the fact that there are still browsers being maintained and updated for XP users is amazing, doubly so that it's on such a frequent basis. I feel like the XP to 7 to 10 transition, over time, can be accomplished and I feel very comfortable about it now. For now, I'm happy that I'm still able to use this legendary, venerable OS as my 'daily driver'. MS's finest hour for sure! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msfntor Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 1 hour ago, cmccaff1 said: Roy has definitely made a tremendous effort over the years with his browser forks. I am always excited to try a new release, even if there's the occasional bug...the fact that there are still browsers being maintained and updated for XP users is amazing, doubly so that it's on such a frequent basis. I feel like the XP to 7 to 10 transition, over time, can be accomplished and I feel very comfortable about it now. For now, I'm happy that I'm still able to use this legendary, venerable OS as my 'daily driver'. MS's finest hour for sure! How beautifully this thought is captured! I probably would not be able to express my thoughts in such a way. .... Thank you! This website has no content, in all my browsers, coming from Chrome (- but on latest Basilisk Moebius is OK)..: https://phiab.com/commentary/probably-the-fastest-web-site-in-the-world/ This same for it's home page: https://phiab.com/ -nothing in Chrome forks, Please help me! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 Appears to me that Chrome-based is doing what it is told to do - 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 (edited) And so is St52, those are the only two browsers I checked in (just noticed that this is not the "latest", upgrading soon) - Edited April 19, 2023 by NotHereToPlayGames 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 27 minutes ago, msfntor said: but on latest Basilisk Moebius is OK I have no idea what this is. St52's About screen says nothing about "Moebius". St55's About screen says nothing about "Moebius". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 (edited) The "latest" St52 and St55 are not being sent the same HTML as being sent to other browswers (including older St52 and St55). The "latest" St52 and St55 are not being sent the visibility: hidden for the <body> tag. No clue "why", changing user agent did not get the "latest" St (forgot if I tested in 52 or 55) to be sent the visibility: hidden. Limited investigation, could not isolate "why", but this will give you a headstart into something to look for - why is that visibility: hidden being sent to older browser's <body> tags but not to "latest" St's ??? Edited April 19, 2023 by NotHereToPlayGames 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msfntor Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 1 hour ago, msfntor said: but on latest Basilisk Moebius is OK I have no idea what this is. Basilisk/Serpent Moebius version 55...?... browser made from Firefox lately very good but slow sometimes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamonUn Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 He is referring to St55, it is not in the version info but every time roy posts a new St55 release he states: > New build of post-deprecated Serpent/moebius for XP! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msfntor Posted April 19, 2023 Share Posted April 19, 2023 51 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: a headstart into something to look for - why is that visibility: hidden being sent to older browser's <body> tags but not to "latest" St's ??? Microsoft's snake oil, get here instantly like always Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts