Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Actually I just did. The post was just for effect :) The bug has been fixed and also pushed to the 2.47 source tree. The next builds whenever they arrive should contain the fix. Big thanks to the TB team. FRG Paul B. Gallagher wrote: Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: Just a followup to test a

Re: 64-bit versions of SeaMonkey

On 12/4/2016 4:12 PM, S Slicer wrote: > I had been using SeaMonkey 32-bit version 2.40 successfully on Windows > 10 Pro 64-bit, then switched to SeaMonkey 64-bit version 2.45. Both > worked very well for me. Then while running 2.45, when I checked for an > update, there was version 2.47. I

Re: 64-bit versions of SeaMonkey

On 12/4/2016 4:12 PM, S Slicer wrote: > I had been using SeaMonkey 32-bit version 2.40 successfully on Windows > 10 Pro 64-bit, then switched to SeaMonkey 64-bit version 2.45. Both > worked very well for me. Then while running 2.45, when I checked for an > update, there was version 2.47. I

64-bit versions of SeaMonkey

I had been using SeaMonkey 32-bit version 2.40 successfully on Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, then switched to SeaMonkey 64-bit version 2.45. Both worked very well for me. Then while running 2.45, when I checked for an update, there was version 2.47. I ran into e-mail problems with 2.47

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: Just a followup to test a new version. Pass, friend. BTW, wouldn't it be quicker and easier to run a bunch of tests in which you specify "send later" and then inspect them in the Outbox? -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher

Re: Seamonkey 2.40

Thank you, Walt, One more thing, if I just do not use 2.40 till it gets fixed or replaced, do I have to totally remove it from my computer while I use another program? SeaMonkey 2.40 has not been patched to fix this known security vulnerability. All including Edge are subject to unknown

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

> So given the results ... it appears to me that Adrian has > indeed patched those builds agains the exploit. Thanks! Lee On 12/4/16, NoOp wrote: > On 12/4/2016 10:16 AM, Lee wrote: > >> >> nit: has anyone that _knows_ said that the Dec 1 version of SeaMonkey >>

Re: Seamonkey 2.40

On 12/4/2016 2:31 PM, Pat Connors wrote: > Okay, I am totally confused about what I should do or not do. I am > thinking of not using 2.40 and instead use Microsoft Edge until > SeaMonkey does it update. Question, should I completely erase 2.40 or > does just not using it keep my computer

Re: Seamonkey 2.40

On 12/04/2016 05:31 PM, Pat Connors wrote: Okay, I am totally confused about what I should do or not do. I am thinking of not using 2.40 and instead use Microsoft Edge until SeaMonkey does it update. Question, should I completely erase 2.40 or does just not using it keep my computer safe?

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/2016 2:49 PM, Richmond wrote: > Richmond writes: > >> In this thread there are some test cases: >> >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066 >> > > I cannot get Aurora to crash today. I am not sure why. But some of the > tests show that the address

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

Richmond writes: > In this thread there are some test cases: > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066 > I cannot get Aurora to crash today. I am not sure why. But some of the tests show that the address sanitizer has trapped something. So maybe having a build

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/2016 2:25 PM, Richmond wrote: > NoOp writes: > >> On 12/4/2016 11:50 AM, Richmond wrote: >>> NoOp writes: >>> >>> (See comments: 84, 85, and 86 - which for some reason have been marked as 'offtopic' by ryanvm) >>>

Re: Seamonkey 2.40

Okay, I am totally confused about what I should do or not do. I am thinking of not using 2.40 and instead use Microsoft Edge until SeaMonkey does it update. Question, should I completely erase 2.40 or does just not using it keep my computer safe? Will 2.40 email be safe or if I use

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

NoOp writes: > On 12/4/2016 11:50 AM, Richmond wrote: >> NoOp writes: >> >> >>> (See comments: 84, 85, and 86 - which for some reason have been marked >>> as 'offtopic' by ryanvm) >> >> Because the bug report is for firefox, not

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/2016 11:33 AM, NoOp wrote: > On 12/4/2016 10:16 AM, Lee wrote: > >> >> nit: has anyone that _knows_ said that the Dec 1 version of SeaMonkey >> 2.47 has the patch for that exploit? > > I tested Adrian's 2.47's per bug report: > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066 > (See

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/2016 11:50 AM, Richmond wrote: > NoOp writes: > > >> (See comments: 84, 85, and 86 - which for some reason have been marked >> as 'offtopic' by ryanvm) > > Because the bug report is for firefox, not seamonkey. > Sorry, but I disagree: Product:

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

Lee wrote on 04-12-16 19:16: On 12/4/16, Ray_Net wrote: Lee wrote on 04-12-16 17:18: On 12/4/16, Desiree wrote: On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith wrote: I'm

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Just a followup to test a new version. FRG Mason83 wrote: On 04/12/2016 20:17, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: Yes. Patch might still need some work but I left positive feedback. Should be fixed soon with soon not meaning tomorrow :) Cool. I don't post much to the problem Usenet server, but if

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/02/2016 03:30 PM, NFN Smith wrote: I'm watching discussions relating to the SVG exploit, and am a little confused about what steps I should take. I'm one of the users that has stayed with 2.40, and for the most part, I'm content to wait until a new release comes through the normal

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/04/2016 11:48 AM, TCW wrote: On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 03:29:14 -1000, Desiree wrote: On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith wrote: I'm watching discussions relating to the SVG exploit, and am a little

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 12/4/2016 8:23 AM, Mason83 wrote: > On 04/12/2016 14:06, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > >> This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. Not much >> you >> can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is ready it will be >> included in >> a future 2.47. > >

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

NoOp writes: > (See comments: 84, 85, and 86 - which for some reason have been marked > as 'offtopic' by ryanvm) Because the bug report is for firefox, not seamonkey. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/2016 10:16 AM, Lee wrote: > > nit: has anyone that _knows_ said that the Dec 1 version of SeaMonkey > 2.47 has the patch for that exploit? I tested Adrian's 2.47's per bug report: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066 (See comments: 84, 85, and 86 - which for some reason

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 20:17, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > Yes. Patch might still need some work but I left positive feedback. Should be > fixed soon with soon not meaning tomorrow :) Cool. I don't post much to the problem Usenet server, but if need be, I have a work-around: Send Later, then close SM,

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

>>Looks good from here. Yes. Patch might still need some work but I left positive feedback. Should be fixed soon with soon not meaning tomorrow:) On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 13:47:15 -0500, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: >>Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: >> Would changing defaut to English work around the

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: Would changing defaut to English work around the issue? No. I have en-US installed. A fix is needed. This message was prepared with the patch for Bug 1322054 in my SeaMonkey. Shouldn't contain the field if it works. Looks good from here. -- War doesn't determine

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

> Would changing defaut to English work around the issue? No. I have en-US installed. A fix is needed. This message was prepared with the patch for Bug 1322054 in my SeaMonkey. Shouldn't contain the field if it works. FRG Mason83 wrote: On 04/12/2016 18:57, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: As

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/16, Richmond wrote: > Lee writes: > > >> Can Firefox or SeaMonkey automatically update on your machine? If yes >> you're running with admin privs and are _not_ practicing safe >> anything. >> > > That isn't quite true. If you are running firefox on

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 18:57, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > As Mason83 said not all servers complain about it or we would have > caught it earlier. Now tracked in bug 1322054. In SeaMonkey this > happens even with a dictionary installed fwiw. Jorg seems to think that a dictionary changes something? I'm

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/16, Ray_Net wrote: > Lee wrote on 04-12-16 17:18: >> On 12/4/16, Desiree wrote: >>> On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith wrote: > I'm watching

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Followup bug 1289493 is still open for SeaMonkey. With it you would have probably only seen it without a dictionary in the profile. This is rare so no problem for TB. On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 18:34:55 +0100, Mason83 wrote: >>On 04/12/2016 17:23, Mason83 wrote: >>> On 04/12/2016 14:06, Frank-Rainer

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

>>the user can never send any mail at all. That's pretty much the >>definition of a fatal error for an email program. Yeahh, life is a bitch :) As Mason83 said not all servers complain about it or we would have caught it earlier. Now tracked in bug 1322054. In SeaMonkey this happens even

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

Lee writes: > Can Firefox or SeaMonkey automatically update on your machine? If yes > you're running with admin privs and are _not_ practicing safe > anything. > That isn't quite true. If you are running firefox on windows you can install the mozilla update service and it

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 17:23, Mason83 wrote: > On 04/12/2016 14:06, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > >> This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. Not much >> you >> can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is ready it will be >> included in >> a future 2.47. > >

Re: 0day exploit - Security update for SeaMonkey needed?

On 11/30/2016 07:06 AM, WaltS48 wrote: There's a zero-day exploit in the wild that's being used to execute malicious code on the computers of people using Tor and possibly other users of the Firefox browser, officials of the anonymity service confirmed Tuesday. The versions span from 41 to

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 17:20, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: > Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > >> This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. >> Not much you can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is >> ready it will be included in a future 2.47. > > So no workaround? > > If

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

Lee wrote on 04-12-16 17:18: On 12/4/16, Desiree wrote: On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith wrote: I'm watching discussions relating to the SVG exploit, and am a little confused about what steps I

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 14:06, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: > This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. Not much > you > can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is ready it will be > included in > a future 2.47. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1169184

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. Not much you can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is ready it will be included in a future 2.47. So no workaround? If all outgoing messages are prone to this error, it essentially

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/4/16, Desiree wrote: > On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: >> On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith >> wrote: >> >>>I'm watching discussions relating to the SVG exploit, and am a little >>>confused about what steps I should take. >>> <..

Re: Seamonkey 2.40 and SVG exploit

On 12/3/2016 3:30 AM, TCW wrote: On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:30:53 -0700, NFN Smith wrote: I'm watching discussions relating to the SVG exploit, and am a little confused about what steps I should take. I'm one of the users that has stayed with 2.40, and for the most part,

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

This is caused by Bug 1169184. I think a check there is incomplete. Not much you can do about it right now. If I am right and a fix is ready it will be included in a future 2.47. On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 23:34:40 +0100, Mason83 wrote: >>Hello, >> >>I'm seeing this error on a different Usenet

Re: Google Earth's Time Lapse fails to work correctly in SeaMonkey v2.40? Dang send referers!

On 12/3/2016 6:38 AM, Daniel wrote: On 3/12/2016 8:09 PM, Ant wrote: On 12/1/2016 11:26 PM, Mason83 wrote: On 02/12/2016 07:59, Ant wrote: On 12/1/2016 7:07 PM, Ant wrote: https://earthengine.google.com/timelapse/ Or just in mine? 64-bit W7 HPE SP1's IE11 web browser worked though. What

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 09:52, Mason83 wrote: > I have set "Fallback Text Encoding" and the other to > "Default for Current Locale" which sets > mailnews.send_default_charset=UTF-8 > mailnews.view_default_charset=ISO-8859-1 After restarting SM. ___

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 04:43, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: > And what are your settings under Edit | Preferences | Mail & Newsgroups | > Text encoding? Good idea. Nothing is set. Scanning about:config ... mail.default_charsets.migrated=1 mailnews.reply_in_default_charset=true

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 09:33, Mason83 wrote: > On 04/12/2016 04:43, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: > >> As you say downthread, the field is present but empty. >> >> What happens if you manually select a language (View | Encoding in the >> composition window)? Does SM 2.47 fill the field, or still leave it

Re: Weird error on another Usenet server

On 04/12/2016 04:43, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: > As you say downthread, the field is present but empty. > > What happens if you manually select a language (View | Encoding in the > composition window)? Does SM 2.47 fill the field, or still leave it blank? Let's see... I'm setting Options > Text