DebianThis forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Yeah, I've known this for almost a year now and this still bothers me on a daily basis. My desktop at home is Debian with XFCE, so I use CTRL+F2 to get the run dialog and I type ice and hit tab then enter to get icewesel running.. Then my notebook uses Xubuntu and I'm always doing ice tab enter and getting an error and have to put fir tab enter. I think the whole thing is retarded and a waste of time. I even had to go into my iceweasel's settings to make it identify as FF2.0 so that I can access some sites (bank for example) which do browser detection and block out unsupported/unknown browsers... Pain in the rear if you ask me.
I'd change banks. Obviously yours has no consideration for HTML standards, which means it is probably also not very secure.
Being a web developer, I don't agree with you. Web security is not based on HTML standards, its based on the browsers security capabilities. Admit it, some browsers are safer than others. Would you logon to your bank account using Internet Explorer 5? Or how about some off-the-wall browser that you, nor anyone you know has ever heard of before? I dont think so. Only the latest, well known browsers are sure to contain the higher standards of security measures that some sites require (like a bank), so only the latest and most well known browser are going to be on the allowed list. This is for the customer's security. That's not to say there are some off-the-wall browsers or even older browsers that aren't capable, but the odds are against.
My original point was just that it frustrates me that I am using a FireFox browser that doesnt get recognized as a FireFox browser. In fact, on my own server, my firefox statistics dropped significantly and the "others" category has peaked (mostly because I am 50% of the traffic) for a few months before I changed its identity settings. A bank is not going to let a "other" browser login for security reasons, and frankly neither would I.
I've actually thought long and hard about ditching Iceweasel and installing Firefox manually, but the Debian in me keeps me on Iceweasel. I'll bitch and moan about it, but I'll accept it for what it is.
A bank is not going to let a "other" browser login for security reasons, and frankly neither would I.
My bank lets me log in with Epiphany, or Iceweasel. They are constantly adding new layers of security, and Epiphany (unlike Fireweasel) does not store my password in clear text. My bank login goes through what appears to be a 3rd party application identifying itself as "enterprise2.openbank.com"
Quote from the blog of Debian Developer, Martin-Eric Racine:
Epiphany vs Firefox compatibility issues
Even though Firefox and xulrunner are essentially the same codebase, the different browser-agent is enough to make Epiphany unsuitable for everyday use. As I recall, Rosbeh and several others reported this as being one of two reasons for shipping Firefox as their default browser, the other being a question of brand recognition: Firefox had the full-page ad in the New York Times and is multi-platform, while Epiphany is virtually unknown and GNOME-specific.
My understanding of that statement is that the use of a browser "tag" to identify the worthiness of the browser being used is unnecessary and not a standard procedure. It's certainly none of my bank's business if I choose to use a "non-standard" browser, and enabling only IE or Firefox "for security reasons" has got to be some kind of joke.
User agent switcher extension for Firefox.. What is it two clicks and my browser can impersonate pretty much any other browser or even the google bot.. how is using that information as a security measure even worth while ? it's far to easy to change on the client side.
'Tis true, both of you, but you forget one thing. The client is the one wanting to be secure from hackers/sniffers/etc, so using a well known browser is the best way to go. Most people dont know that a browser can change its identity. Hell, most people dont know what a "browser" is. To them they just use "Internet Explorer" or "Firefox" or "Safari" or whatever their OS came with. These ignorant people are the ones being protected by using such security restrictions. Us geeks know enough to bypass any set of security systems placed in front of us, so something like this seems "silly" at best to us. I speak for the majority when I talk about security, not the all-knowing tech gods.