Firefox hack attack warning

August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM


Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other software
from Mozilla.

The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
been affected.

Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches become
available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in Information
Technology (BSI) in Bonn.

The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as well
as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11 is
vulnerable to hacker attacks.

Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually at
http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.

No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in all
versions prior to 2.0.0.16.

DPA

Bigbazza (Barry)

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:22:25 +1000, "Bigbazza" >
wrote:

>Firefox hack attack warning
>
> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>
>
>Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other software
>from Mozilla.
>
>The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
>been affected.
>
<snip>
>
Turning off your computer when you're away from it will help prevent
hacker attacks (although why a hacker would *want* to attack you is
beyond me), keeps your house cooler and lowers the electricity bill.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Bigbazza wrote:
> Firefox hack attack warning
>
> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>
>
> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
> software from Mozilla.
>
> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
> been affected.
>
> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>
> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11 is
> vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>
> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually at
> http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>
> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in all
> versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>
> DPA
>
> Bigbazza (Barry)

Funny, I've received no such warning.

<been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>

Pennyaline wrote:
> Bigbazza wrote:
>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>
>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>
>>
>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>> software from Mozilla.
>>
>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have
>> also been affected.
>>
>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
>> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>
>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
>> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11
>> is vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>
>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually
>> at http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>
>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in
>> all versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>
>> DPA
>>
>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>
> Funny, I've received no such warning.
>
> <been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
Probably because, like me, you're using the latest releases that aren't
affected.

George Shirley wrote:
> Pennyaline wrote:
>> Bigbazza wrote:
>>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>>
>>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>>> software from Mozilla.
>>>
>>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have
>>> also been affected.
>>>
>>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security
>>> in Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>>
>>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1
>>> as well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to
>>> 1.1.11 is vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>>
>>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually
>>> at http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>>
>>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in
>>> all versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>>
>>> DPA
>>>
>>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>>
>> Funny, I've received no such warning.
>>
>> <been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
> Probably because, like me, you're using the latest releases that aren't
> affected.

I'm not using the latest version of seamonkey, and I haven't
gotten any warning or update notice. Nonetheless...

--
Jean B.

Jean B. wrote:
> George Shirley wrote:
>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>> Bigbazza wrote:
>>>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>>>
>>>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>>>> software from Mozilla.
>>>>
>>>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have
>>>> also been affected.
>>>>
>>>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>>>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security
>>>> in Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>>>
>>>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1
>>>> as well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to
>>>> 1.1.11 is vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>>>
>>>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them
>>>> manually at http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>>>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>>>
>>>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in
>>>> all versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>>>
>>>> DPA
>>>>
>>>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>>>
>>> Funny, I've received no such warning.
>>>
>>> <been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
>> Probably because, like me, you're using the latest releases that
>> aren't affected.
>
> I'm not using the latest version of seamonkey, and I haven't gotten any
> warning or update notice. Nonetheless...
>
I don't even use Seamonkey so can't vouch for that one.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:00:12 -0600, Pennyaline
> wrote:

>Bigbazza wrote:
>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>
>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>
>>
>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>> software from Mozilla.
>>
>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
>> been affected.
>>
>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
>> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>
>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
>> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11 is
>> vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>
>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually at
>> http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>
>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in all
>> versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>
>> DPA
>>
>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>
>Funny, I've received no such warning.
>
><been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>

Could be they are set to automatically update. I also use Firefox and
Thunderbird and they are both at the latest revision, without any
effort on my part.

Ron Kelley

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:45:05 -0500, George Shirley wrote:

> Pennyaline wrote:
>> Bigbazza wrote:
>>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>>
>>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>>> software from Mozilla.
>>>
>>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have
>>> also been affected.
>>>
>>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
>>> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>>
>>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
>>> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11
>>> is vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>>
>>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually
>>> at http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>>
>>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in
>>> all versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>>
>>> DPA
>>>
>>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>>
>> Funny, I've received no such warning.
>>
>> <been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
> Probably because, like me, you're using the latest releases that aren't
> affected.

for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to automatically
check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they send
out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they haven't
asked me if i want 3.0.1.)

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:43:32 -0700, Ron wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:00:12 -0600, Pennyaline
> > wrote:
>
>>Bigbazza wrote:
>>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>>
>>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>>> software from Mozilla.
>>>
>>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
>>> been affected.
>>>
>>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
>>> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>>
>>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
>>> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11 is
>>> vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>>
>>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually at
>>> http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>>
>>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in all
>>> versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>>
>>> DPA
>>>
>>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>>
>>Funny, I've received no such warning.
>>
>><been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
>
> Could be they are set to automatically update. I also use Firefox and
> Thunderbird and they are both at the latest revision, without any
> effort on my part.
>
> Ron Kelley

automatic updates are a choice under tools/options/updates.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:45:05 -0500, George Shirley wrote:
>
>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>> Bigbazza wrote:
>>>> Firefox hack attack warning
>>>>
>>>> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
>>>> software from Mozilla.
>>>>
>>>> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have
>>>> also been affected.
>>>>
>>>> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
>>>> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
>>>> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>>>>
>>>> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
>>>> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11
>>>> is vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>>>>
>>>> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually
>>>> at http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
>>>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>>>>
>>>> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in
>>>> all versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>>>>
>>>> DPA
>>>>
>>>> Bigbazza (Barry)
>>> Funny, I've received no such warning.
>>>
>>> <been using Firefox and Thunderbird for a few years, too>
>> Probably because, like me, you're using the latest releases that aren't
>> affected.
>
> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to automatically
> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they send
> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they haven't
> asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>
> your pal,
> blake
I've been getting the updates without a problem and am using version
2.0.0.16 with updates. Haven't seen 3.0.1 offered as yet. I'm happy with
both ff and T-bird.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:42:41 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

>I've been getting the updates without a problem and am using version
>2.0.0.16 with updates. Haven't seen 3.0.1 offered as yet. I'm happy with
>both ff and T-bird.

I have a feeling it updates whatever version you have. I get updates
several times a week, so I was surprised to find my browser version
was way behind when I put FF on a new computer.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

blake murphy wrote:

> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to automatically
> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they send
> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they haven't
> asked me if i want 3.0.1.)

Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out <g>

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to automatically
>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they send
>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they haven't
>> asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>
> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out <g>

maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
proper to check.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to
>>> automatically
>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they
>>> send
>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they
>>> haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>>
>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out
>> <g>
>
> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
> proper to check.
>
> your pal,
> blake

FWIW, Dear Hubby has been using Version 3.0 on one of his computers for
a while and I haven't heard him swearing too loudly about it. i.e. it
seems to work well enough.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Egg tastes better when it's not on your face...

ChattyCathy wrote:
> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>
>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to
>>>> automatically
>>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they
>>>> send
>>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they
>>>> haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out
>>> <g>
>> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
>> proper to check.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> FWIW, Dear Hubby has been using Version 3.0 on one of his computers for
> a while and I haven't heard him swearing too loudly about it. i.e. it
> seems to work well enough.

I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and log
in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.

Dave Smith wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>
>>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to
>>>>> automatically
>>>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they
>>>>> send
>>>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they
>>>>> haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>>>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out
>>>> <g>
>>> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
>>> proper to check.
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> FWIW, Dear Hubby has been using Version 3.0 on one of his computers for
>> a while and I haven't heard him swearing too loudly about it. i.e. it
>> seems to work well enough.
>
> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and log
> in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.
I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
they were bought out.

blake murphy wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>
> > blake murphy wrote:
> >
> >> (oddly, though, they haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
> >
> > Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little
> > left-out <g>
>
> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
> proper to check.

No, it's just that it's totally different animal than the 2.0.0.X
series. I know, because Firefox 3 won't run on my system at home. They
update the series you have.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

George Shirley wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to
>>>>>> automatically
>>>>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they
>>>>>> send
>>>>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they
>>>>>> haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>>>>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out
>>>>> <g>
>>>> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
>>>> proper to check.
>>>>
>>>> your pal,
>>>> blake
>>>
>>> FWIW, Dear Hubby has been using Version 3.0 on one of his computers for
>>> a while and I haven't heard him swearing too loudly about it. i.e. it
>>> seems to work well enough.
>>
>> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
>> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
>> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
>> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and
>> log in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.
> I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
> supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
> Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
> they were bought out.

True. Actually Netscape 9 (IIRC) seems to be just like Firefox,
so why bother? I am mainly using Seamonkey now, with Firefox next
in line.

--
Jean B.

Jean B. wrote:

> George Shirley wrote:
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
>>> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
>>> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
>>> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and
>>> log in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.

>> I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
>> supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
>> Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
>> they were bought out.
>
> True. Actually Netscape 9 (IIRC) seems to be just like Firefox,
> so why bother? I am mainly using Seamonkey now, with Firefox next
> in line.
>
Heck, IMHO *anything* is better than Internet Exploder so I am not about
to argue with (any of) you ;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Egg tastes better when it's not on your face...

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Jean B. wrote:
>
>> George Shirley wrote:
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
>>>> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
>>>> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
>>>> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and
>>>> log in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.
>
>>> I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
>>> supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
>>> Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
>>> they were bought out.
>> True. Actually Netscape 9 (IIRC) seems to be just like Firefox,
>> so why bother? I am mainly using Seamonkey now, with Firefox next
>> in line.
>>
> Heck, IMHO *anything* is better than Internet Exploder so I am not about
> to argue with (any of) you ;-)

I almost NEVER resort to using that--only if I can't access
something any other way--and then only if I really want to see
whatever it is. I have always HATED IE.

--
Jean B.

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:21:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>I almost NEVER resort to using that--only if I can't access
>something any other way--and then only if I really want to see
>whatever it is. I have always HATED IE.

Me too, but I'm hating it less now that it has tabs. Why they decided
to make the "home" icon so tiny and in such an odd place is beyond me.
Only the geniuses at microsoft know for sure.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

ChattyCathy wrote:

> Jean B. wrote:
>
>> George Shirley wrote:
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
>>>> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
>>>> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
>>>> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and
>>>> log in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.
>
>>> I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
>>> supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
>>> Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
>>> they were bought out.
>>
>> True. Actually Netscape 9 (IIRC) seems to be just like Firefox,
>> so why bother? I am mainly using Seamonkey now, with Firefox next
>> in line.
>>
> Heck, IMHO *anything* is better than Internet Exploder so I am not about
> to argue with (any of) you ;-)

I believe Netscape is a slightly older version of Firefox, with some AOL
crap added. I'm willing to be corrected, but by facts, not knee-jerk
reactions from AOLheads.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Jean B. wrote:
>
>> George Shirley wrote:
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
>>>> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
>>>> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
>>>> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and
>>>> log in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.
>
>>> I used Netscape for years and had the same problem once AOL quit
>>> supporting it. Switched over to Firefox and haven't had a problem.
>>> Basically both are/were Mozilla software but Netscape went south once
>>> they were bought out.
>> True. Actually Netscape 9 (IIRC) seems to be just like Firefox,
>> so why bother? I am mainly using Seamonkey now, with Firefox next
>> in line.
>>
> Heck, IMHO *anything* is better than Internet Exploder so I am not about
> to argue with (any of) you ;-)
I have honestly never used IE except when I visit one of my kids and use
their computer. The Mozilla browsers seem so much more friendly and
easier to work. DW uses it at work because the school system insists you
add nothing to or take nothing away from their computers, then she has
to transition back to FF here at home.

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:21:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> I almost NEVER resort to using that--only if I can't access
>> something any other way--and then only if I really want to see
>> whatever it is. I have always HATED IE.
>
> Me too, but I'm hating it less now that it has tabs. Why they decided
> to make the "home" icon so tiny and in such an odd place is beyond me.
> Only the geniuses at microsoft know for sure.
>
>
Whispers: I don't like tabs.

--
Jean B.

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:52:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>Whispers: I don't like tabs.

OMG! What don't you like? I thought tabbed browsing was god's
special gift to me. I first had it with the Mozilla of old and I was
still on dial up. Go to a site, while the graphics rich page loads -
go to another and start loading it. Go back to site #1 and it's done.
Life was good and I didn't hate dial up. I LOVE tabbed browsing even
now. Why would you want all those windows open when you can just have
tabs? I have enough programs open to tile my screen as it is.




--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:52:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> Whispers: I don't like tabs.
>
> OMG! What don't you like? I thought tabbed browsing was god's
> special gift to me. I first had it with the Mozilla of old and I was
> still on dial up. Go to a site, while the graphics rich page loads -
> go to another and start loading it. Go back to site #1 and it's done.
> Life was good and I didn't hate dial up. I LOVE tabbed browsing even
> now. Why would you want all those windows open when you can just have
> tabs? I have enough programs open to tile my screen as it is.
>
>
>
>
Eerm, I liked looking down and seeing exactly what is open. Yeah,
it can get a bit crowded though. I have 5 Seamonkey windows
open, not including the newsgroup and composition windows. Plus
email open. I can place my cursor over each window and see what's
there.... I dunno. Maybe it's that I'm a dino--or it is a
function of how one's mind works or doesn't work.

--
Jean B.

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:27:19 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:52:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>
>>> Whispers: I don't like tabs.
>>
>> OMG! What don't you like? I thought tabbed browsing was god's
>> special gift to me. I first had it with the Mozilla of old and I was
>> still on dial up. Go to a site, while the graphics rich page loads -
>> go to another and start loading it. Go back to site #1 and it's done.
>> Life was good and I didn't hate dial up. I LOVE tabbed browsing even
>> now. Why would you want all those windows open when you can just have
>> tabs? I have enough programs open to tile my screen as it is.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Eerm, I liked looking down and seeing exactly what is open. Yeah,
>it can get a bit crowded though. I have 5 Seamonkey windows
>open, not including the newsgroup and composition windows. Plus
>email open. I can place my cursor over each window and see what's
>there.... I dunno. Maybe it's that I'm a dino--or it is a
>function of how one's mind works or doesn't work.

I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place and
cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled so you
don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the tab and you
know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in new tabs.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:52:47 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
> > Whispers: I don't like tabs.
>
> OMG! What don't you like? I thought tabbed browsing was god's
> special gift to me. I first had it with the Mozilla of old and I was
> still on dial up. Go to a site, while the graphics rich page loads -
> go to another and start loading it. Go back to site #1 and it's done.
> Life was good and I didn't hate dial up. I LOVE tabbed browsing even
> now. Why would you want all those windows open when you can just have
> tabs? I have enough programs open to tile my screen as it is.

Did you know that you can open all the bookmarks from a folder each in
its own tab? I keep the links for all the online comics I read in a
separate folder, then I can open everything in tabs with one click.
Then just close the window with all the tabs when I'm done.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

sf wrote:
> I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
> tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place and
> cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled so you
> don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the tab and you
> know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in new tabs.
>
>
Maybe just a matter of what one is used to.

--
Jean B.

<sf> wrote
> I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
> tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place and
> cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled so you
> don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the tab and you
> know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in new tabs.
>

I use I.E. 6 just to avoid tabs. I used 7 for a while and ditched it. We is
all creechures of habbit.

Jean B. wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
> > tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place
> > and cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled
> > so you don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the
> > tab and you know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in
> > new tabs.
> >
> >
> Maybe just a matter of what one is used to.

Well, no. Tabs are fairly new, so none of us were all that used to
them. I was first exposed with the original Mozilla.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

cybercat wrote:
> <sf> wrote
>> I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
>> tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place and
>> cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled so you
>> don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the tab and you
>> know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in new tabs.
>>
>
> I use I.E. 6 just to avoid tabs. I used 7 for a while and ditched it. We is
> all creechures of habbit.
>
>
Oh good. I'm not the only one....

--
Jean B.

Default User wrote:
> Jean B. wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>> I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
>>> tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place
>>> and cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled
>>> so you don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the
>>> tab and you know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in
>>> new tabs.
>>>
>>>
>> Maybe just a matter of what one is used to.
>
> Well, no. Tabs are fairly new, so none of us were all that used to
> them. I was first exposed with the original Mozilla.
>
> Brian
>
Of course, that's true, but some are obviously MORE resistant to
change.

--
Jean B.

Jean B. wrote:

> cybercat wrote:

> > I use I.E. 6 just to avoid tabs. I used 7 for a while and ditched
> > it. We is all creechures of habbit.
> Oh good. I'm not the only one....

You know, you don't HAVE to use the tabs.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Bigbazza wrote:
> Firefox hack attack warning
>
> August 17, 2008 - 3:26PM
>
>
> Several security holes have been discovered in Firefox and other
> software from Mozilla.
>
> The Thunderbird e-mail program and the Seamonkey program suite have also
> been affected.
>
> Users should update their software as soon as possible once patches
> become available, recommends the German Federal Agency for Security in
> Information Technology (BSI) in Bonn.
>
> The warning applies to Firefox versions prior to 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1 as
> well as to Seamonkey. In the latter case, any version prior to 1.1.11 is
> vulnerable to hacker attacks.
>
> Those who do not receive automated updates can download them manually at
> http://www.mozilla.com/firefox or
> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases.
>
> No update is available as yet for Thunderbird, which is affected in all
> versions prior to 2.0.0.16.
>
> DPA
>
> Bigbazza (Barry)
>
>

Interesting piece of information. It's really vague and says nothing
about the nature of the attack. I don't feel there's any need to update
anything based on this one isolated report. Who the heck is BSI?

OTOH, who the heck is DSI? :-)

blake murphy wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to automatically
>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they send
>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they haven't
>>> asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out <g>
>
> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
> proper to check.
>
> your pal,
> blake

I went to the Firefox, Mozilla and Thunderbird usenet boards. There was
absolutely no mention of any security issues.

From what I saw, 3.0 was still quasi-beta With people reporting
issues. That's probably why we haven't been automatically updated.

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Dave Smith wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:38:28 -0500, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>
>>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> for firefox, there's an option under tools/options/updates to
>>>>> automatically
>>>>> check for updates to firefox and your add-ons. it seems to me they
>>>>> send
>>>>> out an update to f.f. every couple of months. (oddly, though, they
>>>>> haven't asked me if i want 3.0.1.)
>>>> Me either! I'm glad you mentioned it. I was feeling a little left-out
>>>> <g>
>>> maybe it's quasi-beta status or something. i haven't gone to the site
>>> proper to check.
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> FWIW, Dear Hubby has been using Version 3.0 on one of his computers for
>> a while and I haven't heard him swearing too loudly about it. i.e. it
>> seems to work well enough.
>
> I have been using Firefox for about a week. I was using trusty old
> Netscape Communicator but it started crapping out on me and I was
> getting messages that AOL doesn't support my reader, and I don't use
> AOL. I still prefer Netscape except that I would have to open it and log
> in 3-4 times before it stopped self destructing on me.

I left Netscape a few years ago for Mozilla Suite. Then I went to
Firefox when I got this computer 2 years ago. Firefox has pretty skins.

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Jean B. wrote:

> I almost NEVER resort to using that--only if I can't access something
> any other way--and then only if I really want to see whatever it is. I
> have always HATED IE.
>

Me, too.

When I was living in the RV, the easiest way for me to get online was
via AOL (dialup with a toll free number on a borrowed phone jack).
The minute I'd connect, I'd launch Netscape then later Mozilla to
browse. When my cell phone became usable as a modem (around 2001), I
just used Mozilla.

I still get email via AOL and I have to say that it's really clean (and
now really free)so I'm going to keep it. As for browsers, AOL's sucked
and IE sucks even more. I have the toggle installed on my FF browser for
those few sites that require IE, but as time progresses they are fewer
and fewer.

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

On 19 Aug 2008 22:49:13 GMT, "Default User" >
wrote:

>Jean B. wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>> > I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
>> > tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place
>> > and cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled
>> > so you don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the
>> > tab and you know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in
>> > new tabs.
>> >
>> >
>> Maybe just a matter of what one is used to.
>
>Well, no. Tabs are fairly new, so none of us were all that used to
>them. I was first exposed with the original Mozilla.
>
Not that new. Tabs have been around 7-10 years and that's long enough
to get used to them. It was love at first sight for me.





--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:00:37 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>cybercat wrote:
>> <sf> wrote
>>> I don't understand the difference between what you're doing and
>>> tabbing. Tabs are neater too. They don't hop all over the place and
>>> cover up each other like windows do. Tabs are neatly labeled so you
>>> don't have to guess what's there either. Just look at the tab and you
>>> know what you have! I also like hyperlinks to open in new tabs.
>>>
>>
>> I use I.E. 6 just to avoid tabs. I used 7 for a while and ditched it. We is
>> all creechures of habbit.
>>
>>
>Oh good. I'm not the only one....

Obviously both of you are throwbacks to Neanderthal.




--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West