Opera 12.18
-
blackbird71 last edited byThanks for the heads-up. It's great to see Opera updated security protocols for the 12.xx series; they really didn't have to, but they chose too - so good on 'em for that!! Thus far, it's working well at the handful of sites I've tried.
-
-
-
rseiler last edited by
It's not working in 12.17 today, either. It's probably a coincidence. dragonfly.opera.com is down.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
With opera 12.18 dragonfly doesn't work anymore
Apparently the dragonfly server is down. I get the following message in BOTH 12.14 and 12.18: "Could not connect to remote server. You tried to access the address https://dragonfly.opera.com/app/, which is currently unavailable. ..."
-
streunerx last edited by
Is this adress temporary unavailable or closed for ever?
-> Bad question ... i was to fast ... it is online again
It would be very nice when old variant of opere gets new sql lite and other included libs to
-
stng last edited by
No linux and MacOS builds.
"Further, as we don’t see a significant number of users of Opera 12 and Opera Mail on non-Windows platforms, we won’t be updating for those."
WTF? It's really so expensive or labour-intensive?
-
plovec last edited by
It's not working in 12.17 today, either. It's probably a coincidence. dragonfly.opera.com is down.
Have you tried to uncheck this option
opera:config#DeveloperTools|ProxyAutoConnect
it should avoid the autoupdate of opera dragonfly
If you don't have dragonfly offline maybe this could help:
https://opvardarchive.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/opera-dragonfly-is-here-and-it-works-offline/ -
empej107 last edited by
No linux and MacOS builds.
"Further, as we don’t see a significant number of users of Opera 12 and Opera Mail on non-Windows platforms, we won’t be updating for those."
WTF? It's really so expensive or labour-intensive?What a pity.
I thought that the Linux users were (are) a significant amount of total users of Opera 12.*.
Beside that, it looks like there were some modifications into binaries. Replacing only op*.dat files did not help for the previous version of the browser so we are dependent on the mercy of Opera.
The solutions seem to be using Wine or a proxy exclusively for those problematic sites.
-
-
davehawley last edited by
Ohhh, the Opera Presto update screen, I never thought I'd see you again!!
:love: :love: :love: -
laingman last edited by
I got the update message and said no because thought it wanted to update to new opera. I hope it will fix the frequent closing issue.
-
rseiler last edited by
When were you seeing frequent closing issues with 12.17? I can recall one that related to certain security protocols, but not a lot of people saw it, and I think it's gone now.
-
laingman last edited by
When were you seeing frequent closing issues with 12.17? I can recall one that related to certain security protocols, but not a lot of people saw it, and I think it's gone now.
It closed on me all the time and could not pin it down to any site or anything. That and taking way too long to load some sites like news sites were my two main issues. And some site did not work anymore(chase bank for one) but most that didn't work work security related, fatal error 40, 80, etc
-
Deleted User last edited by
omg, unbelievable!
https working again for most sites.thanks to the devs that have not forgotten the old users.
-
davehawley last edited by
Yes, I've been plagued with sudden shutdowns on Opera 12.17 for months.
I thought it was related to a plugin (specifically Flash) but have never been able to completely confirm that.
So far so good, not had any yet, and I'm hoping that it won't happen with 12.18.
-
rseiler last edited by
Had you ever enabled TLS 1.1 and 1.2 in 12.17? That would cause random crashes for me. It's not a problem in 12.18, however.
-
davehawley last edited by
I would appreciate some advice on what the recommended security protocol settings are now for 12.18.
On 12.17, I had SSL 3 deselected, and TLS 1, 1.1, and 1.2 all selected, and that's how they still are now on 12.18.
IIRC I did have one of the TLS options deselected for quite a long time, but then I found a website that wouldn't work without it.
So, what's the recommended best settings now for compatibility and security?
Any advice welcome.
-
rseiler last edited by
The one important thing is SSL3 off. After that, as you say, you will still occasionally find a site that needs TLS1, so that's probably why they left it enabled. As I recall, negotiation goes from the top down, so it's not as if having all the TLS's enabled means that TLS1 would be used over TLS 1.2 if the site supported 1.2.
Even Chrome, which might be the most aggressive of the browsers in this arena, has TLS1 enabled (Firefox does too).
-
blackbird71 last edited by
The negotiation normally starts by seeking the highest-grade protocol that can be employed by the browser and site together and which supports a mutually-available encryption cipher associated or available for the protocol, all as specified in the site-cert. If one can't be agreed upon, the negotiation moves downward until it (hopefully) finds one that works. In a sense, the site server is the partner who should best understand the security requirements of the possible transactions it supports and should be the one to call off the negotiation if a suitably safe protocol and encryption cipher can't be agreed upon - whereupon the browser reports it's unable to talk securely to the site.
However, some sites' protocols and encryption requirements/certs aren't well thought through and will negotiate down to protocols whose traffic/encryption can perhaps be too readily cracked or hijacked... in which case, a knowledgeable user may elect to block (uncheck) lesser protocols within his own browser, just in case. In too many cases, 'lazy' sites will only offer a lowest-grade protocol, take it or leave it, so that a user has to accept low-grade protocols or forego the site entirely. And a complicating factor in all this is that all the TLS protocols have certain weaknesses (though fewer than the SSLs), some arguably easier to possibly exploit than others, so that one can't necessarily just argue that TLS1.2 is "safer" than TLS1.1 under all conditions.
At the end of the day, a knowledgeable user has to use whatever he finds works best for him and those secure sites he uses. Less knowledgeable users probably should just turn on whatever is available if browser compatibility with all sites is desired over technically-best traffic security.
