Author Topic: internet explorer  (Read 412 times)

Offline paintmaw

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 216
internet explorer
« on: April 24, 2001, 07:58:00 PM »
I just dl'ed the newest IE trying to get rid of this damn GOHIP thing that keeps popping up advertisements every 20 seconds . Is there anyway to get rid of this annoying crap
??
( I have ALWAYS HATED IE , why do companies insist on using it )   .... must be cheaper

Offline 2Late4U

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
internet explorer
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2001, 08:01:00 PM »
They use it so that Microshaft can't play the "we cant help you its your browsers incompatability" game when they have a problem with the OS

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
internet explorer
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2001, 08:23:00 PM »
Try Opera

Sandman_SBM

  • Guest
internet explorer
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2001, 08:23:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by paintmaw:
( I have ALWAYS HATED IE , why do companies insist on using it )   .... must be cheaper

Because it's much more compliant with W3C standards than Nutscrape. What were you using before? I've heard good things about Opera and NeoPlanet didn't seem to bad.

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
internet explorer
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2001, 09:15:00 PM »
Golden Rule: DO NOT UPGRADE MS products unless it is extremely necessary (aka, product is beyond 4 years old).
Do NOT get the updates from MS website. Let it be, resist the temptation, save your pc.

Offline Animal

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5027
internet explorer
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2001, 09:16:00 PM »
I like IE pretty much
at least its much better than netscrap

Offline -ammo-

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5124
internet explorer
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2001, 09:26:00 PM »
Opera is great!! Been using it for months.
Commanding Officer, 56 Fighter Group
Retired USAF - 1988 - 2011

Offline Skorpyon

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 110
internet explorer
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2001, 10:10:00 PM »
Check out both of these "articles" for instructions on removal of GoHip.  Hope it helps.  BTW, I found this info by simply typing "remove uninstall GoHip" in to my search window. http://www.adcop.org/smallfish/gohip.htm
 

http://www.thecomplaintstation.com/w/_wwwgohipcom/0000001f.htm

  As far as the IE/Netscape debate, I had been a hardcore Netscape fan since back in the 1.x versions, but in the past year I found Netscape crashes way too often, and IE has been rock solid (as browsers go anyway).  Just my 2 pennies worth.    

{edit} My son came in as I was reading my posted reply, and I asked him about GoHip, as I thought I remembered him having it on his machine.  Needless to say, his immediate tirade about it matches everyone else's feelings.  He said that a "band aid" fix is to hit the Stop button before it loads, but this only kills the ads, etc.  Your email program, default start page, etc. are all still hacked, and would require the above remedies.  


------------------
Skorpyon
~900th Bloody Jaguars~
"Feel the Sting......"


[This message has been edited by Skorpyon (edited 04-24-2001).]

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
internet explorer
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2001, 01:12:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by paintmaw:
( I have ALWAYS HATED IE , why do companies insist on using it )   .... must be cheaper

'cause it's nicer than Nutscrape.  I was die hard against IE (because it sucked) until version 5 came out.  I hesitantly switched to it and I doubt I'll change anytime soon.


SOB
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline paintmaw

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 216
internet explorer
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2001, 02:25:00 AM »
Thanks guys <S>

MrSiD

  • Guest
internet explorer
« Reply #10 on: April 25, 2001, 05:48:00 AM »
IE 5.01 SP2 works pretty fine, 5.5 is murder.. its completely buggy.

Offline Lephturn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1200
      • http://lephturn.webhop.net
internet explorer
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2001, 08:08:00 AM »
I'm running IE 6.0 Preview and it works great.  

I became an IE fan with IE 4.0 and I've never looked back.  I occasionally check out Nutscrape, but it's always a buggy POS in comparison.  Opera is cool, but IE works great for me so I don't need to switch and IE is integrated with my shell, which rocks.

------------------
Sean "Lephturn" Conrad - Aces High Chief Trainer

A proud member of the mighty Flying Pigs
http://www.flyingpigs.com

Check out Lephturn's Aerodrome for AH articles and training info!

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
internet explorer
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2001, 08:13:00 AM »
I switched to I.E. at version 5.0 and found it far more stable than any version of Netscape. I haven't really looked back since. Among the classes I teach is some web editing, and I can tell you it is far easier to get a page to display properly using I.E. than Netscape.

MrSiD

  • Guest
internet explorer
« Reply #13 on: April 25, 2001, 08:16:00 AM »
Lephturn you are one brave individual..

From the reviews of people that have been testing the beta, I got the impression that it brings much more trouble than anything else.

Offline Torque

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2091
internet explorer
« Reply #14 on: April 25, 2001, 09:31:00 AM »
Did you know about express

The following is a Security  Bulletin from the Microsoft Product
Security
Notification Service.

Please do not  reply to this message,  as it was sent  from an
unattended
mailbox.
                    ********************************

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

- ----------------------------------------------------------------
------
Title:      IE can Divulge Location of Cached Content
Released:   06 March 2001
Revised:    20 April 2001 (version 2.0)
Software:   Microsoft Windows Script Host 5.1 and 5.5
Impact:     Run code of attacker's choice
Bulletin:   MS01-015

Microsoft encourages customers to review the Security Bulletin at: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-015.asp.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
------

Reason for Revision:
====================
A regression was found in the previously released Windows Script
Host
patch referenced in the first version of this security bulletin.
We
have updated and re-released the Windows Script Host patch and
have
updated the bulletin
accordingly. The re-release only applies to changes with the
Windows
Script Host patches available in the bulletin. No changes have
been
made to the originally released Internet Explorer patches.

Customers who applied the Windows Script Host patch when this
bulletin was first released should download and apply the updated
Windows Script Host patch referenced in the bulletin.  Customers
who
did not apply the Windows Script Host when this bulletin was first
released are encouraged to apply the Windows Script Host patch
listed
in the bulletin.

Issue:
======
The IE security architecture provides a caching mechanism that is
used
to store content that needs to be downloaded and processed on the
user's local machine. The purpose of the cache is to obfuscate the
physical location of the cached content, in order to ensure that
the
web page or HTML e-mail will work through the IE security
architecture
to access the information. This ensures that the uses of the
information can be properly restricted.

A vulnerability exists because it is possible for a web page or
HTML
e- mail to learn the physical location of cached content. Armed
with
this
information, an attacker could cause the cached content to be
opened
in
the Local Computer Zone. This would enable him to launch compiled
HTML
help (.CHM) files that contain shortcuts to executables, thereby
enabling him to run the executables.

In addition to eliminating this vulnerability, the patches
provided
below eliminate three other vulnerabilities that either pose
significantly less risk or could only be exploited in very
restricted
situations:

A variant of the Frame Domain Verification vulnerability discussed
in
Microsoft Security Bulletins MS00-033, MS00-055, and MS00-093. The
vulnerability could enable a malicious web site operator to open
two
browser windows, one in the web site's domain and the other on the
user's local file system, and to pass information from the latter
to
the former. This could enable the web site operator to read, but
not
change, any file on the user's local computer that could be opened
in
a
browser window.

A vulnerability that is identical in effect to the Frame Domain
Verification vulnerability, but which actually results from a flaw
in
Windows Script Host rather than IE. Because it could only be
exploited
via IE, we have provided the fix here. The fix that was released
on
March 06, 2001, was subsequently discovered to have a regression
error,
and a corrected version was released on April 19, 2001.

A vulnerability that affects how Telnet sessions are invoked via
IE.
By
design, telnet sessions can be launched via IE. However, a
vulnerability exists because when doing so, IE will start Telnet
using
any command-line options the web site specifies. This only becomes
a
concern when using the version of the Telnet client that installs
as
part of Services for Unix (SFU) 2.0 on Windows NT 4.0 or Windows
2000
machines. The version of the Telnet client in SFU 2.0 provides an
option for creating a verbatim transcript of a Telnet session. An
attacker could start a session using the logging option, then
stream
an
executable file onto the user's system in a location that would
cause
it to be executed automatically the next time the user booted the
machine. The flaw does not lie in the Telnet client, but in IE,
which
should not allow Telnet to be started remotely with command-line
arguments.

Mitigating Factors:
====================
None of the vulnerabilities could be exploited without some user
action - either browsing to the attacker's site or opening a mail
from him.

 - Customers who exercise safe browsing habits would be less
likely
   visit untrustworthy sites, and customers who have used the
Security
   Zones feature to restrict what HTML mail can do would be less
likely to
   be affected by this vulnerability.

 - The variants of the "frame domain verification" vulnerability
discussed
   above could only be used to view files, and only file types
that
can be
   opened in a browser window.

 - The vulnerability affecting Telnet invocation is only a concern
for
   customers who are using the Telnet client that ships as part of
   Services for Unix 2.0. Other versions of Telnet do not include
the
   command-line feature to create log files.

Patch Availability:
===================
 - A patch is available to fix this vulnerability. Please read the
   Security Bulletin
   http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms01-015.asp
   for information on obtaining this patch.

Acknowledgment:
===============
 - Oliver Friedrichs of securityfocus.com (for reporting the
Telnet
invocation issue)

- ----------------------------------------------------------------
-----

THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE MICROSOFT KNOWLEDGE BASE IS
PROVIDED
"AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. MICROSOFT DISCLAIMS ALL
WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT
SHALL
MICROSOFT CORPORATION OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES
WHATSOEVER INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL,
LOSS
OF BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF MICROSOFT
CORPORATION
OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES.
SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
FOR
CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES SO THE FOREGOING LIMITATION
MAY
NOT
APPLY.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.3

iQEVAwUBOuDW8o0ZSRQxA/UrAQF4Wgf/ZD7WgzNHbS9chijhW8TU/JilgMh0Eybo
0uJVD06vixpQNgd2w0AIMbgsGYwbt eAj7d+/OS9xO9X78avr+ZaiBfuMuzQwse/t
FZQp7kxbOjfhia0636kqbHhuGlH/EiMGbL4Jql9njO10unxIq73QGB5Ljmx8DF+k
q8VLZ/FrUanY1zF8GaH/I6wx7ileL5d1oxsyPkKw2DsIf7ZQjFe/Q3puIKyIDGyX
854umfUxThAoQH2zOQ/8hOg/jxC1e5SRmQ7Wjv4KyQeX4LpCROiDd1GO9h1xixSe
5K7dj9MdDr1nDis70+q+r1KRylf766q0j/LTt0zea0BEbbVSp7BjLQ==
=owqt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


******************************************************************
*
You have received  this e-mail bulletin as a result  of your
registration
to  the   Microsoft  Product  Security  Notification   Service.
You  may
unsubscribe from this e-mail notification  service at any time by
sending
an  e-mail  to
MICROSOFT_SECURITY-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@ANNOUNCE.MICROSOFT.COM
The subject line and message body are not used in processing the
request,
and can be anything you like.

To verify the digital signature on this bulletin, please download
our PGP
key at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/notify.asp.

For  more  information on  the  Microsoft  Security Notification
Service
please  visit http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/notify.asp.   For
security-related information  about Microsoft products, please
visit the
Microsoft Security Advisor web site at http://www.microsoft.com/security.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Heretic" <Heretic@art-museum.org>
To: "Thugs" <subgenius@armchair.mb.ca>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 2:25 AM
Subject: [SubG] Geek: The Devil's Tools


>
> So we know about that Outlook Express thing where you can get
nailed
> with
> a virus-infected attachment without having to open it.  Anybody
> know the fix for that?
>
> -Tick
> uses somethin' else
>
>