Re: Cookie Control
NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 06:23 PM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 The fact that something has been discussed a lot here does not mean the user community is satisfied with the outcome. Whether you're talking about the Form Manager or the Cookie Manager, there are a lot of people out here who miss the old functionality and want it back. You can say no until you're blue in the face, but that won't change what people want. If you recall the history of computer software, a lot of programs have lost market share or even failed entirely by telling the user he absolutely can't have what he wants and the programmers know better what he should have. Hell, this isn't even peculiar to software -- it's true for lots of products of all types. I keep meaning to upgrade to 1.1.18 for the security fixes, but I'm in no hurry to upgrade to a program that doesn't do important things that I've come to know and love in v. 1, and I certainly won't be out there promoting v. 2 to my friends by bragging about the lost features. You may not like it, but the truth is the truth, reality is what it is, and facts are stubborn things. These are features the users want. Cool your jets. Jets' temperature just fine. -- Hiroko Uchiyama (内山裕子). I'm actually pretty calm about this, but that doesn't mean I'm happy or satisfied. I'm certainly not as angry as you seem to think. That thread not only discusses the issue, but also provides links to the bug report(s) regarding the issue. If you recall, you actually commented on the thread - BeeNeR did not, and may have actually found the information in the thread helpful. I do recall, I remember it well. For those too lazy to look up read the thread, here are the bug reports referenced: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362908 [Missing option to restrict third-party cookies] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349680#c13 [Allow sites to set cookies for the original site only missing from cookie preferences] and that last is marked as a duplicate of: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421494 [reimplement third party cookie blocking] Status: RESOLVED FIXED And no, I've no idea why it is marked as such. Nor do I. So rather than getting pissed off at me because I referred BeeNeR to the thread, feel free to review the bug(s) and figure out a solution if you are capable of doing so. If I had the technical knowhow and the time, I would have done so already. I don't. If I had just the technical knowhow, I would find a way to make the time, but I don't. If you read this board regularly, you've seen that I'm happy to offer solutions, even partial ones, when I can. In this case I can't. -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. I agree. That one additional setting would help prevent me from having to take time out from some enjoyable web surfing, just to manually handle all the cookies thrown my way! Rob ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. http://www.phillipmjones.net/SeaMonkeyCookieManager.png Also click Manage Cookies and look at each tab. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
On or about 1/5/2010 9:05 AM, Phillip Jones typed the following: BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. http://www.phillipmjones.net/SeaMonkeyCookieManager.png Also click Manage Cookies and look at each tab. Yes, I can block or set session only for sites. BUT it must be done for each individual site manually (type in or copy paste). This means I have to look at each cookie, determine if I want to allow, set for session, or deny access manually. 1.x had many more options, and when sent the way I wanted it I basically could let well enough alone. It worked fine with little intervention from me. -- Ed http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1zhwu A dog is a man's best friend. A cat is a cat's best friend. —Robert J. Vogell ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
On 1/5/2010 6:00 AM, Rob C. wrote: BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. I agree. That one additional setting would help prevent me from having to take time out from some enjoyable web surfing, just to manually handle all the cookies thrown my way! Rob When I finally had winnowed the cookies to the set that was desired, I copied the files cookies.sqlite and cookies.sqlite-journal into files cookies.sqlite-backup and cookies.sqlite-journal-backup respectively. (I don't know if this was necessary for cookies.sqlite-journal, but I didn't want to analyze this.) I created a script that reversed this, copying the backup files over the corresponding source files. I run this script just before launching SeaMonkey. I have four SeaMonkey profiles. My script operates on two of them (both of which I had winnowed and created backups). A third profile is for guests; the same script merely deletes cookies.sqlite and cookies.sqlite-journal. The fourth profile is for certain financial sites that make logging-in complicated unless I leave their cookies alone; my script ignores that profile. (That fourth profile also always spoofs Firefox because the site owners refuse to acknowledge that Gecko is Gecko.) While this seems cumbersome, it addresses a missing capabilty of the Cookie Manager. Sometimes, I want to view a Web site in a manner different from the way I usually do. This causes established cookies to be changed, making that different view now the standard. By backing up my cookies and having the script restore from the backup, I can restore my desired default view. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ Go to Mozdev at http://www.mozdev.org/ for quick access to extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other Mozilla-related applications. You can access Mozdev much more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
BeeNeR wrote: On or about 1/5/2010 9:05 AM, Phillip Jones typed the following: BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. http://www.phillipmjones.net/SeaMonkeyCookieManager.png Also click Manage Cookies and look at each tab. Yes, I can block or set session only for sites. BUT it must be done for each individual site manually (type in or copy paste). This means I have to look at each cookie, determine if I want to allow, set for session, or deny access manually. 1.x had many more options, and when sent the way I wanted it I basically could let well enough alone. It worked fine with little intervention from me. Try the *web Developer * 1.1.8 extension It has controls over Cookies. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 The fact that something has been discussed a lot here does not mean the user community is satisfied with the outcome. Whether you're talking about the Form Manager or the Cookie Manager, there are a lot of people out here who miss the old functionality and want it back. You can say no until you're blue in the face, but that won't change what people want. If you recall the history of computer software, a lot of programs have lost market share or even failed entirely by telling the user he absolutely can't have what he wants and the programmers know better what he should have. Hell, this isn't even peculiar to software -- it's true for lots of products of all types. I keep meaning to upgrade to 1.1.18 for the security fixes, but I'm in no hurry to upgrade to a program that doesn't do important things that I've come to know and love in v. 1, and I certainly won't be out there promoting v. 2 to my friends by bragging about the lost features. You may not like it, but the truth is the truth, reality is what it is, and facts are stubborn things. These are features the users want. -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
On 01/05/2010 06:23 PM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 The fact that something has been discussed a lot here does not mean the user community is satisfied with the outcome. Whether you're talking about the Form Manager or the Cookie Manager, there are a lot of people out here who miss the old functionality and want it back. You can say no until you're blue in the face, but that won't change what people want. If you recall the history of computer software, a lot of programs have lost market share or even failed entirely by telling the user he absolutely can't have what he wants and the programmers know better what he should have. Hell, this isn't even peculiar to software -- it's true for lots of products of all types. I keep meaning to upgrade to 1.1.18 for the security fixes, but I'm in no hurry to upgrade to a program that doesn't do important things that I've come to know and love in v. 1, and I certainly won't be out there promoting v. 2 to my friends by bragging about the lost features. You may not like it, but the truth is the truth, reality is what it is, and facts are stubborn things. These are features the users want. Cool your jets. That thread not only discusses the issue, but also provides links to the bug report(s) regarding the issue. If you recall, you actually commented on the thread - BeeNeR did not, and may have actually found the information in the thread helpful. For those too lazy to look up read the thread, here are the bug reports referenced: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362908 [Missing option to restrict third-party cookies] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349680#c13 [Allow sites to set cookies for the original site only missing from cookie preferences] and that last is marked as a duplicate of: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421494 [reimplement third party cookie blocking] Status: RESOLVED FIXED And no, I've no idea why it is marked as such. So rather than getting pissed off at me because I referred BeeNeR to the thread, feel free to review the bug(s) and figure out a solution if you are capable of doing so. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
On 1/5/2010 6:43 PM, NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 06:23 PM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 The fact that something has been discussed a lot here does not mean the user community is satisfied with the outcome. Whether you're talking about the Form Manager or the Cookie Manager, there are a lot of people out here who miss the old functionality and want it back. You can say no until you're blue in the face, but that won't change what people want. If you recall the history of computer software, a lot of programs have lost market share or even failed entirely by telling the user he absolutely can't have what he wants and the programmers know better what he should have. Hell, this isn't even peculiar to software -- it's true for lots of products of all types. I keep meaning to upgrade to 1.1.18 for the security fixes, but I'm in no hurry to upgrade to a program that doesn't do important things that I've come to know and love in v. 1, and I certainly won't be out there promoting v. 2 to my friends by bragging about the lost features. You may not like it, but the truth is the truth, reality is what it is, and facts are stubborn things. These are features the users want. Cool your jets. That thread not only discusses the issue, but also provides links to the bug report(s) regarding the issue. If you recall, you actually commented on the thread - BeeNeR did not, and may have actually found the information in the thread helpful. For those too lazy to look up read the thread, here are the bug reports referenced: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362908 [Missing option to restrict third-party cookies] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349680#c13 [Allow sites to set cookies for the original site only missing from cookie preferences] and that last is marked as a duplicate of: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421494 [reimplement third party cookie blocking] Status:RESOLVED FIXED And no, I've no idea why it is marked as such. So rather than getting pissed off at me because I referred BeeNeR to the thread, feel free to review the bug(s) and figure out a solution if you are capable of doing so. The first two bug reports were closed as duplicates, eventually pointing to #421494. There was actually a code-change for that one that supposedly fixed the problem. However, implementing the fix apparently depends on fixing three other bugs: 436471, 441166, and 450450. When I open the Preferences window in SeaMonkey 2.0.1 and select [Privacy Security Cookies], I see Cookie Acceptance Policy with a choice among three radio buttons. One of those radio buttons is Allow cookies for the originating website only. To me, that means Don't allow third party cookies. Does this not work in SeaMonkey 2? -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ Go to Mozdev at http://www.mozdev.org/ for quick access to extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other Mozilla-related applications. You can access Mozdev much more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Cookie Control
David E. Ross wrote: On 1/5/2010 6:43 PM, NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 06:23 PM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: NoOp wrote: On 01/05/2010 03:27 AM, BeeNeR wrote: Are there any plans to update the security of cookies to the settings that were available in 1.x SM? i.e. Preferences/Privacy Security/Cookies/Allow cookies based on privacy settings. Being able to have different levels of acceptance/denial of various cookies was, at least *I* though, a great idea. Perhaps you missed this thread? Disappointed in changes to cookie management SM 1.1.18 vs. 2.0RC1 The fact that something has been discussed a lot here does not mean the user community is satisfied with the outcome. Whether you're talking about the Form Manager or the Cookie Manager, there are a lot of people out here who miss the old functionality and want it back. You can say no until you're blue in the face, but that won't change what people want. If you recall the history of computer software, a lot of programs have lost market share or even failed entirely by telling the user he absolutely can't have what he wants and the programmers know better what he should have. Hell, this isn't even peculiar to software -- it's true for lots of products of all types. I keep meaning to upgrade to 1.1.18 for the security fixes, but I'm in no hurry to upgrade to a program that doesn't do important things that I've come to know and love in v. 1, and I certainly won't be out there promoting v. 2 to my friends by bragging about the lost features. You may not like it, but the truth is the truth, reality is what it is, and facts are stubborn things. These are features the users want. Cool your jets. That thread not only discusses the issue, but also provides links to the bug report(s) regarding the issue. If you recall, you actually commented on the thread - BeeNeR did not, and may have actually found the information in the thread helpful. For those too lazy to look up read the thread, here are the bug reports referenced: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362908 [Missing option to restrict third-party cookies] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349680#c13 [Allow sites to set cookies for the original site only missing from cookie preferences] and that last is marked as a duplicate of: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421494 [reimplement third party cookie blocking] Status: RESOLVED FIXED And no, I've no idea why it is marked as such. So rather than getting pissed off at me because I referred BeeNeR to the thread, feel free to review the bug(s) and figure out a solution if you are capable of doing so. The first two bug reports were closed as duplicates, eventually pointing to #421494. There was actually a code-change for that one that supposedly fixed the problem. However, implementing the fix apparently depends on fixing three other bugs: 436471, 441166, and 450450. When I open the Preferences window in SeaMonkey 2.0.1 and select [Privacy Security Cookies], I see Cookie Acceptance Policy with a choice among three radio buttons. One of those radio buttons is Allow cookies for the originating website only. To me, that means Don't allow third party cookies. Does this not work in SeaMonkey 2? From my Readings of the bugs it was there but it don't work. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.net http://www.vpea.org mailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
