 | | Re: Opera Software browser (was: Re: MSIE5 security hole)
|
|
(...) I hope it has cookie support. Otherwise, there's somthing kinda scary aboutthis COOKIES.DAT in my user directory! Seriously, I have Opera 3.60 and it works beautifully. It has JavaScript with an amazing feature: You can have JavaScript on for (...) (25 years ago, 2-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Opera Software browser (was: Re: MSIE5 security hole)
|
|
(...) Hey! I see a cookies.dat file in my user directory too. That's very interesting. Hmm. Darn thing's binary (boo! hiss!) but anyway, as far as I can tell, the cookies feature in Opera 3.60 is forgen borken. If you know how to make 'em work, I'd (...) (25 years ago, 2-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Opera Software browser (was: Re: MSIE5 security hole)
|
|
(...) What sites are these? I'll try them with mine. (...) Mine does it just fine. How were these tags used? It passed this short test with flying black-on-grey: <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Definition List Test</TITLE></HEAD> <BODY> <DL> <DT>Spoon</DT> <DD>A (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Opera Software browser (was: Re: MSIE5 security hole)
|
|
(...) I can't give out the URLs because they're private LUGNET-admin pages, but one that you could test which uses the same cookie-storage code is this: (URL) guess is: If a website named www.foo.com sends a cookie labled .foo.com, that Opera (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Opera Software browser (was: Re: MSIE5 security hole)
|
|
(...) Could you modify your cookies so that it used www.lugnet.com instead of .lugnet.com? So that at least _one_ site is compatible with Opera ;^) I'm getting pretty sick of typing my name/address in the web interface. (...) It seems to do unclosed (...) (25 years ago, 12-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
