Zoeken in Support

Vermijd ondersteuningsscams. We zullen u nooit vragen een telefoonnummer te bellen, er een sms naar te sturen of persoonlijke gegevens te delen. Meld verdachte activiteit met de optie ‘Misbruik melden’.

Learn More

Deze conversatie is gearchiveerd. Stel een nieuwe vraag als u hulp nodig hebt.

Why did you spent time for integration of Pocket and not in solving the "Logjam"-vulberability?

  • 2 antwoorden
  • 1 heeft dit probleem
  • 9 weergaven
  • Laatste antwoord van cor-el

more options

Why was the logjam-problem not solved? I think it's more impotant than the pocket-integration.

Why was the logjam-problem not solved? I think it's more impotant than the pocket-integration.

Gekozen oplossing

You can also toggle the involved prefs to false on the about:config page.

  • security.ssl3.dhe_rsa_aes_128_sha
  • security.ssl3.dhe_rsa_aes_256_sha

You can open the about:config page via the location/address bar. You can accept the warning and click "I'll be careful" to continue.

Dit antwoord in context lezen 👍 0

Alle antwoorden (2)

more options

hi thairis, mozilla cannot "solve" the logjam vulnerability since this is a vulnerability in the configuration of web-servers (that their respective owners, admins would have to fix). all a browser can do (and firefox 39 will do) is to disallow users from accessing insecure servers and displaying an error message instead. until then you can use this mozilla-provided addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/disable-dhe/

more options

Gekozen oplossing

You can also toggle the involved prefs to false on the about:config page.

  • security.ssl3.dhe_rsa_aes_128_sha
  • security.ssl3.dhe_rsa_aes_256_sha

You can open the about:config page via the location/address bar. You can accept the warning and click "I'll be careful" to continue.