Anyone know how to update the root certificates for Firefox 2.0 ?

[98 Guy]

Basically, I think that my root certificates (and probably yours too -
if you use Firefox 2.0.0.20) need to be updated.

Anyone know how to do this?

[98 Guy]

Post by 98 Guy
Basically, I think that my root certificates (and probably yours too -
if you use Firefox 2.0.0.20) need to be updated.
Anyone know how to do this?

This might (or it does) have something to do with the file nssckbi.dll.

Maybe I can replace my existing version of that file with a more recent
version - even if it's from a newer version of filefox...

[000-222-000]

Post by 98 Guy

Post by 98 Guy
Basically, I think that my root certificates (and probably yours too -
if you use Firefox 2.0.0.20) need to be updated.
Anyone know how to do this?

This might (or it does) have something to do with the file nssckbi.dll.
Maybe I can replace my existing version of that file with a more recent
version - even if it's from a newer version of filefox...

''By Joe''
Guy that may work.....

[000-222-000]

Post by 98 Guy
Basically, I think that my root certificates (and probably yours too -
if you use Firefox 2.0.0.20) need to be updated.
Anyone know how to do this?

98 Guy Firefox 2.0.0.20 does not include Phishing Protection you need Firefox 3,
And System Requirements
.Windows Vista
.Windows Vista x64
.Windows XP
.Windows XP x64
.Windows 2000

No Windows 98!

Version History of Firefox 2.0.0.20

Note: This is the last planned release of Firefox 2.
All users are encouraged to upgrade to Firefox 3.
Firefox 2.0.0.20 does not include Phishing Protection.

Release Date:
December 18, 2008
Security Update:
Firefox 2.0.0.20 includes an additional security fix over Firefox 2.0.0.19
for users of the Windows platform.
The following security issue was fixed.
Earlier Changes:
For information about previous changes,
please see the Firefox 2.0.0.19 Release Notes.

Version History of Firefox 2.0.0.19

Note: This is the last planned release of Firefox 2.
All users are encouraged to upgrade to Firefox 3.
Firefox 2.0.0.19 does not include Phishing Protection.

Release Date:
December 16, 2008
Security Update:
The following security issues were fixed.
Earlier Changes:
For information about previous changes,
please see the Firefox 2.0.0.18 Release Notes.


The last good one for Windows 98,
that include Phishing Protection,
Version History of Firefox 2.0.0.17

Release Date:
September 23, 2008
Security Update:
The following security issues were fixed.
Earlier Changes:
For information about previous changes,
please see the Firefox 2.0.0.16 Release Notes.

< http://www.oldapps.com/firefox.php >

[philo]

Post by 000-222-000

Post by 98 Guy
Basically, I think that my root certificates (and probably yours too -
if you use Firefox 2.0.0.20) need to be updated.
Anyone know how to do this?

98 Guy Firefox 2.0.0.20 does not include Phishing Protection you need Firefox 3,
And System Requirements .Windows Vista
.Windows Vista x64
.Windows XP
.Windows XP x64
.Windows 2000
No Windows 98!

FWIW: I did test some of the newer versions of Firefox on Win98 with
kernel-X

Thought they installed OK,
they functioned too poorly to be of any use

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by philo
FWIW: I did test some of the newer versions of Firefox on Win98 with
kernel-X
Thought they installed OK,
they functioned too poorly to be of any use

Thanks, that saved me some time and trouble. I'd intended to look at that in
case OperaUSB drove me away as Firefox had, and I'd wanted to return.
I think I'll get a lot of mileage out of OperaUSB v10.3 yet.

[philo]

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
FWIW: I did test some of the newer versions of Firefox on Win98 with
kernel-X
Thought they installed OK,
they functioned too poorly to be of any use

Thanks, that saved me some time and trouble. I'd intended to look at that in
case OperaUSB drove me away as Firefox had, and I'd wanted to return.
I think I'll get a lot of mileage out of OperaUSB v10.3 yet.

I've never used OperaUSB but it looks like a great idea!

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by philo

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
FWIW: I did test some of the newer versions of Firefox on Win98 with
kernel-X
Thought they installed OK,
they functioned too poorly to be of any use

Thanks, that saved me some time and trouble. I'd intended to look at
that in case OperaUSB drove me away as Firefox had, and I'd wanted to
return. I think I'll get a lot of mileage out of OperaUSB v10.3 yet.

I've never used OperaUSB but it looks like a great idea!

I was put off Opera every time for years until I saw one on a Windows Mobile
2003 machine that worked well on it. Once I knew there were situations where
it did work, I was ready to see others. Even in the USB-variant, not all is
well with all versions, but this one (this time corectly identified as
v10.53, not 10.3) is great, because although like any browser that does a
lot, it's complex to the point of annoying, but it does keep it all in one
place which makes it manageable. That was it's USB 'selling point' but I just
like the fact that it keeps itself to itself whereever I put it. That, and
the fact that I don't have to use KernelEx (which may be great, I just never
needed to explore it so I put it off).

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by Lostgallifreyan
v10.53

Sod's law rules my world, evidently.
v10.63

[philo]

<snip>

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
I've never used OperaUSB but it looks like a great idea!

I was put off Opera every time for years until I saw one on a Windows Mobile
2003 machine that worked well on it. Once I knew there were situations where
it did work, I was ready to see others. Even in the USB-variant, not all is
well with all versions, but this one (this time corectly identified as
v10.53, not 10.3) is great, because although like any browser that does a
lot, it's complex to the point of annoying, but it does keep it all in one
place which makes it manageable. That was it's USB 'selling point' but I just
like the fact that it keeps itself to itself whereever I put it. That, and
the fact that I don't have to use KernelEx (which may be great, I just never
needed to explore it so I put it off).

I originally did not care for Opera either but it's pretty good now.

Side note: Not sure why I still hang out here on Win98...
I am now a Linux user and only rarely work on Win98 machines any more...
but I still have a few that may be collectors items.

[Robert Macy]

Post by philo
<snip>

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
I've never used OperaUSB but it looks like a great idea!

I was put off Opera every time for years until I saw one on a Windows Mobile
2003 machine that worked well on it. Once I knew there were situations where
it did work, I was ready to see others. Even in the USB-variant, not all is
well with all versions, but this one (this time corectly identified as
v10.53, not 10.3) is great, because although like any browser that does a
lot, it's complex to the point of annoying, but it does keep it all in one
place which makes it manageable. That was it's USB 'selling point' but I just
like the fact that it keeps itself to itself whereever I put it. That, and
the fact that I don't have to use KernelEx (which may be great, I just never
needed to explore it so I put it off).

I originally did not care for Opera either but it's pretty good now.
Side note: Not sure why I still hang out here on Win98...
I am now a Linux user and only rarely work on Win98 machines any more...
but I still have a few that may be collectors items.

Which Linux? Is that the 'best' one for scientific including image
analyses? Best one for obtaining compatible applications? Both?

[philo]

<snip>

Post by Robert Macy

Post by philo
but I still have a few that may be collectors items.

Which Linux? Is that the 'best' one for scientific including image
analyses? Best one for obtaining compatible applications? Both?

I use Ubuntu 10.04

Long time Linux user though , started in the year 2000 and have used
most of the major distributions over the years.

Though back in the old days I did a lot of manual configurations
and even have been known to compile a new kernel on occasion...
I finally decided I just wanted something simple and something that
worked...so Ubuntu seemed to fill the bill

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by philo
<snip>

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
I've never used OperaUSB but it looks like a great idea!

I was put off Opera every time for years until I saw one on a Windows
Mobile 2003 machine that worked well on it. Once I knew there were
situations where it did work, I was ready to see others. Even in the
USB-variant, not all is well with all versions, but this one (this time
corectly identified as v10.53, not 10.3) is great, because although
like any browser that does a lot, it's complex to the point of
annoying, but it does keep it all in one place which makes it
manageable. That was it's USB 'selling point' but I just like the fact
that it keeps itself to itself whereever I put it. That, and the fact
that I don't have to use KernelEx (which may be great, I just never
needed to explore it so I put it off).

I originally did not care for Opera either but it's pretty good now.
Side note: Not sure why I still hang out here on Win98...
I am now a Linux user and only rarely work on Win98 machines any more...
but I still have a few that may be collectors items.

I never got into the Unix file system. C programming was alien to me for
decades, but wanting to do things like shut off monitors and drive motors at
will on a solar power system is adapting me quickly. I will never leave W98,
but I have used other systems, mainly Psion machines, (Organiser, WorkAbout
(useful to learn system services, handling of CPU registers)), so Linux might
end up captivating me. But I suspect OpenBSD will win out, if I can ever make
it as comfortable as W98. Haven't really tried. But I totally love its fdisk
and disklabel tools, best ever for disk preparation. With a foundation like
THAT it ought to be possible to get comfortable, somehow.

[philo]

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
<snip>
I originally did not care for Opera either but it's pretty good now.
Side note: Not sure why I still hang out here on Win98...
I am now a Linux user and only rarely work on Win98 machines any more...
but I still have a few that may be collectors items.

I never got into the Unix file system. C programming was alien to me for
decades, but wanting to do things like shut off monitors and drive motors at
will on a solar power system is adapting me quickly. I will never leave W98,
but I have used other systems, mainly Psion machines, (Organiser, WorkAbout
(useful to learn system services, handling of CPU registers)), so Linux might
end up captivating me. But I suspect OpenBSD will win out, if I can ever make
it as comfortable as W98. Haven't really tried. But I totally love its fdisk
and disklabel tools, best ever for disk preparation. With a foundation like
THAT it ought to be possible to get comfortable, somehow.

I'm no expert at this but like to experiment.

anyway Linux does the job for me...but occasionally will need to run a
Windows app, so still have my XP machine right next to me

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by philo
anyway Linux does the job for me...but occasionally will need to run a
Windows app, so still have my XP machine right next to me

I remembered something that might be useful to you. The OpenBSD people had
something on a web page about writing drivers. If the hardware is cheap
enough it could be worth it, because the 'price' was basically to donate an
example. One reason I stayed with W98 is that despite the low costs of the
original Layla 20 bit audio interface on eBay at times, it's still a largish
donation (for me) and when I find one I usually want to keep it. :)

Echo did open-source the drivers too, which probably helps. I have to wonder
how the OpenBSD coders manage when they only have the device behaviour to go
on.

I mention all that basically because I find hardware to be the most important
reason to stay with W98, though a lot of other things add up to back my
decision.

[philo]

Post by Lostgallifreyan

Post by philo
anyway Linux does the job for me...but occasionally will need to run a
Windows app, so still have my XP machine right next to me

I remembered something that might be useful to you. The OpenBSD people had
something on a web page about writing drivers. If the hardware is cheap
enough it could be worth it, because the 'price' was basically to donate an
example. One reason I stayed with W98 is that despite the low costs of the
original Layla 20 bit audio interface on eBay at times, it's still a largish
donation (for me) and when I find one I usually want to keep it. :)
Echo did open-source the drivers too, which probably helps. I have to wonder
how the OpenBSD coders manage when they only have the device behaviour to go
on.
I mention all that basically because I find hardware to be the most important
reason to stay with W98, though a lot of other things add up to back my
decision.

I started with win95 but needed USB so upgraded to win98.

It worked pretty well but even after using the "safe disconnect" option
the machine would sometimes lock up...
so I got caught in the upgrade game moving to win2k and finally XP


However I was fooling with all the other operating systems I could get
my hands on, Linux, BSD OS/2, BeOS and others.

I finally switched to Linux for security concerns.

I have never owned a new machine and basically just use whatever parts I
can scrounge up, but will sometimes actually purchase a new
component...especially hard drives or an "open box" special motherboard.


I have never considered writing a driver for anything. I would not have
a clue there. I do have a friend who used to do that for HP. I've known
him since high school where he was considered an eccentric genius.

Too bad they edged him out when he got older...fortunately he started
his own company for a while , then got employment elsewhere

[Lostgallifreyan]

Post by philo
I started with win95 but needed USB so upgraded to win98.
It worked pretty well but even after using the "safe disconnect" option
the machine would sometimes lock up...

NUSB. :) It definitely works, though it needs testing carefully if you
install ity to a well-customised and established install. Best to add that
very early in install history.

Post by philo
I finally switched to Linux for security concerns.

I don't know if my bit of speculation in another post just now might help
with that on W9X, but maybe...

Post by philo
I have never owned a new machine and basically just use whatever parts I
can scrounge up, but will sometimes actually purchase a new
component...especially hard drives or an "open box" special motherboard.

I'd be ok with mixed parts now, but initially chose to get something built
myself, but from new bits, with plenty of guidance from the firm selling
them. I wanted to rule out the high uncertainty of using secondhand bits.
Now, I buy mini ITX boards, specifically Via Epia MII12000, whenever they go
cheap, new or used. I find their limitations livable, and they're very
liberating because they don't have so many potential conflicts, or dodgy
contacts, or RF emissions, as with separate parts. (And they save a lot of
energy).

Post by philo
I have never considered writing a driver for anything. I would not have
a clue there. I do have a friend who used to do that for HP. I've known
him since high school where he was considered an eccentric genius.
Too bad they edged him out when he got older...fortunately he started
his own company for a while , then got employment elsewhere

Don't lose him. :) He sounds immensely useful.

[j***@myplace.com]

Post by philo
FWIW: I did test some of the newer versions of Firefox on Win98 with
kernel-X
Thought they installed OK,
they functioned too poorly to be of any use

I have the last 3.x version of FF installed in 98 with the Kernal-Ex.
It works fine for me. However FF 3.x has this stupid problem of putting
itself into "Offline Mode". This was a bug that came with FF 3.x and
cant be fixed. I dont know if they fixed that bug in FF 4.x, but I'd
like to upgrade to 4.x if they did. (I dont need any more bloat and am
satisfied with FF 3.x, but if 4.x is similar and dont have that bug,
I'll upgrade.

Will 4.x run in 98se with the Kernal-Ex?

Did FF fix that bug in 4.x?

Just curious, you said of the newer versions "they functioned too poorly
to be of any use". What problems did you encounter? What versions did
you try? Did 4.x work?

Thanks