Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > chi.internet > #3498 > unrolled thread

RE: From the chicago police website

Back to article view | Back to chi.internet

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  RE: From the chicago police website nobody@nowhere.invalid (Will Renkel) - 2016-06-18 10:58 +0000
    Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-18 12:17 -0700
      Re: From the chicago police website Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> - 2016-06-19 11:13 +0000
        Re: From the chicago police website Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> - 2016-06-19 16:09 +0000
          Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-19 11:36 -0700
          Re: From the chicago police website jamie@ftupet.com (jamie) - 2016-06-20 00:16 +0000
            Re: From the chicago police website barbie gee <booger@nosespam.com> - 2016-06-20 17:52 -0500
            Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-20 23:43 +0000
              Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-20 17:25 -0700
                Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-22 04:42 +0000
                  Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-22 10:40 -0700
                    Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-22 19:45 +0000
                      Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-22 13:36 -0700
                        Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-22 22:36 +0000
                          Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-22 16:08 -0700
                            Re: From the chicago police website smr <me@shawnritchie.com> - 2016-06-22 19:03 -0500
                              Re: From the chicago police website Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> - 2016-06-22 17:38 -0700
                            Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-23 06:02 +0000
                            Re: From the chicago police website Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> - 2016-06-23 10:49 +0000
                              Re: From the chicago police website Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> - 2016-06-23 20:44 +0000
                        Re: From the chicago police website smr <me@shawnritchie.com> - 2016-06-22 19:01 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#3498 — RE: From the chicago police website

I tried firefox and got same result.
BUT with IE9 it worked OK.
mea@brandylion.com wrote:
  >Secure Connection Failed
  >
  >The connection to portal.chicagopolice.org was interrupted while the page was loading.
  >
  >    The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
  >    Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.
  >
  >------
  >
  >I don't recall ever getting one of these errors before.
  >I just wanted to know when the next CAPS meeting
  >was so I can hand them a thumb drive with my collection
  >of 30,000 cars who sped through my stop sign at
  >greater than 7mph.
  >
  >
  >

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
 Will Renkel
 Wheaton, Ill.

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

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#3500

On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 5:58:42 AM UTC-5, Will Renkel wrote:
> I tried firefox and got same result.
> BUT with IE9 it worked OK.
> mea@brandylion.com wrote:
>   >Secure Connection Failed
>   >
>   >The connection to portal.chicagopolice.org was interrupted while the page was loading.
>   >
>   >    The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
>   >    Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.
>   >
>   >------
>   >
>   >I don't recall ever getting one of these errors before.
>   >I just wanted to know when the next CAPS meeting
>   >was so I can hand them a thumb drive with my collection
>   >of 30,000 cars who sped through my stop sign at
>   >greater than 7mph.
>   >
>   >
>   >
> 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>  Will Renkel
>  Wheaton, Ill.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------

LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3507

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:

> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.


For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.

What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.

Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
redirect to the secure port (https://).

Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.

-bruce
bje@ripco.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3508

Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>
>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>
>
> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>
> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>
> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>
> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.

http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3509

On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 11:10:01 AM UTC-5, Geoff Gass wrote:
> Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> > Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> >
> >> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
> >> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
> >
> >
> > For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
> > Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
> >
> > What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
> > a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
> >
> > Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
> > ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
> > that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
> > redirect to the secure port (https://).
> >
> > Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
> > sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
> > tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
> 
> http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
> https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
> I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
> what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
> don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?

I got it from this site:

http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cpd/provdrs/police_services/svcs/find_caps_beat_meetings.html

after searching for when my next CAPS meeting because I'm
about to become a big Pain In The Ass.

Someone got a do nothing IT contract and they exceeded
expectations by doing absolutely nothing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3510

In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>>
>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>>
>>
>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>>
>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>>
>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>>
>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
>
>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?

FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(

Jamie

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3516

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, jamie wrote:

> In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
> Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>> Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>>>
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
>>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>>>
>>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
>>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>>>
>>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
>>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
>>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
>>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>>>
>>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
>>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
>>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
>>
>> http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
>> https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
>> I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
>> what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
>> don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
>
> FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(

and that this is totally not surprising, is not surprising!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3517

jamie <jamie@ftupet.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
> Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>>>
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
>>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>>>
>>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
>>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>>>
>>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
>>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
>>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
>>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>>>
>>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
>>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
>>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
>>
>>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
>>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
>>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
>>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
>>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
> 
> FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(

At least the city made one correct IT decision.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3518

On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 6:43:19 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> jamie <jamie@ftupet.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
> > Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
> >>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> >>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
> >>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
> >>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
> >>>
> >>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
> >>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
> >>>
> >>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
> >>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
> >>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
> >>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
> >>>
> >>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
> >>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
> >>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
> >>
> >>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
> >>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
> >>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
> >>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
> >>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
> > 
> > FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(
> 
> At least the city made one correct IT decision.

Any good web designer knows to make your code work
on only a single browser.  The Intertubes is all about
exclusivity.  I wonder what goon at City Hall got
some kind of kick back.  Maybe they could be bought
with a free vacation and best hookers Seatlle has to offer.

Or maybe they're just lazy fucks.  I'll stick with
Occam's Razor on this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3521

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 6:43:19 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>> jamie <jamie@ftupet.com> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
>> > Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>> >>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>> >>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>> >>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
>> >>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>> >>>
>> >>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
>> >>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>> >>>
>> >>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
>> >>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
>> >>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
>> >>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>> >>>
>> >>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
>> >>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
>> >>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
>> >>
>> >>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
>> >>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
>> >>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
>> >>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
>> >>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
>> > 
>> > FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(
>> 
>> At least the city made one correct IT decision.
> 
> Any good web designer knows to make your code work
> on only a single browser.  The Intertubes is all about
> exclusivity.  I wonder what goon at City Hall got
> some kind of kick back.  Maybe they could be bought

You really think somebody got a kickback for using the browser that comes 
with windows and is a part of the install  image the city no doubt already 
uses?

Are you really that stupid? 

> with a free vacation and best hookers Seatlle has to offer.
> 
> Or maybe they're just lazy fucks.  I'll stick with
> Occam's Razor on this.

I'd love to see the quality software you churn out. I'm sure NetIQ is 
just banging at your door to buy you out.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3522

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 12:23:04 AM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 6:43:19 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> >> jamie <jamie@ftupet.com> wrote:
> >> > In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
> >> > Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
> >> >>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> >> >>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
> >> >>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
> >> >>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
> >> >>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
> >> >>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
> >> >>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
> >> >>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
> >> >>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
> >> >>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
> >> >>
> >> >>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
> >> >>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
> >> >>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
> >> >>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
> >> >>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
> >> > 
> >> > FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(
> >> 
> >> At least the city made one correct IT decision.
> > 
> > Any good web designer knows to make your code work
> > on only a single browser.  The Intertubes is all about
> > exclusivity.  I wonder what goon at City Hall got
> > some kind of kick back.  Maybe they could be bought
> 
> You really think somebody got a kickback for using the browser that comes 
> with windows and is a part of the install  image the city no doubt already 
> uses?

Look retard.  It isn't that hard to make a web site that works
with all browsers if you follow the fucking http1.0 or 1.1 or
whatever standards.  Did CPD get a kickback?  I don't know.
All I know is when dealing with a CPD officer I have a 1 out
of 2 chance of that officer being one gigantic prick who 
would make smr blush.  Of course you have to say yes sir
no sir to the prick or he'll pull his gun out on you because
he's a big giant mother fucking prick.  The other half
are genuinely nice people and seem to want to do a good
job.

Can these fuckers take bribes?  Of course.  

> 
> Are you really that stupid? 
> 
> > with a free vacation and best hookers Seatlle has to offer.
> > 
> > Or maybe they're just lazy fucks.  I'll stick with
> > Occam's Razor on this.
> 
> I'd love to see the quality software you churn out. I'm sure NetIQ is 
> just banging at your door to buy you out.

They don't need https to show a fucking CAPS schedule.  What kind
of retard thought that was a good idea?    Maybe it was people
like you who think Windows servers are da bomb and love sucking
Microsoft cock.

<Insert pic of Ballmer pumping his tiny penis into CL's moutn.?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3523

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 12:23:04 AM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 6:43:19 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>> >> jamie <jamie@ftupet.com> wrote:
>> >> > In article <slrnnmdgun.3kl.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>,
>> >> > Geoff Gass  <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>> >> >>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> LOL.  Isn't there a single IT guy at CPD who isn't sleeping?
>> >> >>>> Fat chance I ever use IE on the open Intertubes.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> For what it's worth, on the mac, Firefox does exactly the same thing but
>> >> >>> Safari (the default mac browser) is fine.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> What it seems like is Firefox is picking up somewhere it's supposed to be
>> >> >>> a secure connection (https) but isn't. And it's not.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Only idea, but it should trip up other browsers, is if they had a cert for
>> >> >>> ssl connects and quit using it. Like on webmail.ripco.com, you can just enter
>> >> >>> that or with the http:// bit, but once it connects, it does a automatic
>> >> >>> redirect to the secure port (https://).
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Else it's some feature of Firefox expecting ssl connections anywhere, which
>> >> >>> sounds as stupid as something they would try to do. They seem to like to
>> >> >>> tinker with it that way, usually backing it off later.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>http://portal.chicagopolice.org is redirecting to
>> >> >>https://portal.chicagopolice.org, it is not firefox trying to do that.  In IE,
>> >> >>I eventually get redirected to http://home.chicagopolice.org/.  I'm not sure
>> >> >>what FF doesn't like about the https site, it's TLS 1.0, which is bad, but I
>> >> >>don't think FF outright blocks it.  Where did Mark get the link to portal?
>> >> > 
>> >> > FWIW, IE is the official browser of the City of Chicago.  :(
>> >> 
>> >> At least the city made one correct IT decision.
>> > 
>> > Any good web designer knows to make your code work
>> > on only a single browser.  The Intertubes is all about
>> > exclusivity.  I wonder what goon at City Hall got
>> > some kind of kick back.  Maybe they could be bought
>> 
>> You really think somebody got a kickback for using the browser that comes 
>> with windows and is a part of the install  image the city no doubt already 
>> uses?
> 
> Look retard.  It isn't that hard to make a web site that works
> with all browsers if you follow the fucking http1.0 or 1.1 or
> whatever standards.  Did CPD get a kickback?  I don't know.

http/1.0 or http/1.1 standards or whatever? By even mentioning those, 
you're clearly in way over your head.

For anybody else, those are standards for a browser to talk to a 
webserver, and has nothing to with with how the page is rendered and 
appears. In short, this guy has no fucking idea of what he's talking 
about, but you're used to that already.



> All I know is when dealing with a CPD officer I have a 1 out
> of 2 chance of that officer being one gigantic prick who 
> would make smr blush.  Of course you have to say yes sir
> no sir to the prick or he'll pull his gun out on you because
> he's a big giant mother fucking prick.  The other half
> are genuinely nice people and seem to want to do a good
> job.
> 
> Can these fuckers take bribes?  Of course.  

It's good to know the folks running the CPS site are beat cops with spare 
time.

>> Are you really that stupid? 
>> 
>> > with a free vacation and best hookers Seatlle has to offer.
>> > 
>> > Or maybe they're just lazy fucks.  I'll stick with
>> > Occam's Razor on this.
>> 
>> I'd love to see the quality software you churn out. I'm sure NetIQ is 
>> just banging at your door to buy you out.
> 
> They don't need https to show a fucking CAPS schedule.  What kind
> of retard thought that was a good idea?    Maybe it was people
> like you who think Windows servers are da bomb and love sucking
> Microsoft cock.

Oh I don't know, maybe people who don't want to see an old cached page 
through a proxy.

> <Insert pic of Ballmer pumping his tiny penis into CL's moutn.?

You might be smart when it comes to keeping rats as pets, but it's clear 
that even at a basic level you don't know what the hell you're talking 
about when it comes to even basic websites and how they work.

It's actually pretty funny that a website run by a city is way over your 
head.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3524

> You might be smart when it comes to keeping rats as pets, but it's clear 
> that even at a basic level you don't know what the hell you're talking 
> about when it comes to even basic websites and how they work.
> 
> It's actually pretty funny that a website run by a city is way over your 
> head.

You're saying a broken web site is way over my head?  How about
this?

<html>
<title>
CAPS Meeting schedule
</title>
<body>
<p>
Next CAPS Meeting 14th District July whatever, 2016
</p>
</body>
</html>

Or something like that...  Real fucking complicated eh?
 
That'll be $50K in consulting fees thank you very much.  
Any retard can make a web page except for perhaps you and 
the CPD.  Maybe you and Nelson should have a conference
call to plan a bunch of meetings to discuss this problem
and pretend you know what you don't.

Who gives a flying fuck if someone is snooping on your
viewing a public schedule.  It's retards like you
who fuck up most everything in tech that is broken
nowadays.  And keep pushing your Windows bullshit
like the good little bitch that you have become.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3525

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> 
>> You might be smart when it comes to keeping rats as pets, but it's clear 
>> that even at a basic level you don't know what the hell you're talking 
>> about when it comes to even basic websites and how they work.
>> 
>> It's actually pretty funny that a website run by a city is way over your 
>> head.
> 
> You're saying a broken web site is way over my head?  How about
> this?
> 
> <html>
> <title>
> CAPS Meeting schedule
> </title>
> <body>
> <p>
> Next CAPS Meeting 14th District July whatever, 2016
> </p>
> </body>
> </html>
> 
> Or something like that...  Real fucking complicated eh?

If you typed up the html by hand, you're an idiot, but again, we knew 
that.

> That'll be $50K in consulting fees thank you very much.  
> Any retard can make a web page except for perhaps you and 
> the CPD.  Maybe you and Nelson should have a conference
> call to plan a bunch of meetings to discuss this problem
> and pretend you know what you don't.

I decided to lookup the next caps beat meetings and came across this page

https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communities/Districts/District12/Events

looks pretty straight foward to me. Wow, I can even "hack" the URL and 
change the district and get the correct calendar with a link of events of 
the month. Or, if I was dumb, but still smarter than you I could click on 
the correct District on the left navigation bar. They're even all listed 
in order for mouth breathers like you. One click on any of the shows the 
calendar for the month. They even have a "You are here" set of crumbs to 
follow around. You'd never come up with anything this sensible.

I'm really not sure why this is all too hard for you considering you're so 
smart with your $50,000 hand typed block of text on a white page with no 
other information "solution".

> Who gives a flying fuck if someone is snooping on your
> viewing a public schedule.  It's retards like you

I already answered why. You didn't understand it, and ignored all the 
points I made about it. I guess you did take a couple hours to break out 
that 1993 html example though. You did forget the DTD tag, just to make 
sure it renders correctly on all browsers. It only takes a few minutes to 
test them all though, right?

> who fuck up most everything in tech that is broken
> nowadays.  And keep pushing your Windows bullshit
> like the good little bitch that you have become.

Your grasp of how anything works is so dated and wrong I don't even know 
where to start.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3526

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:36:28 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:

> I decided to lookup the next caps beat meetings and came across this page
> 
> https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communities/Districts/District12/Events
> 
> looks pretty straight foward to me. 

Here's what I got:
----
Secure Connection Failed

The connection to portal.chicagopolice.org was interrupted while the page was loading.

    The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
    Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.
----------

You're retarded.

> > Who gives a flying fuck if someone is snooping on your
> > viewing a public schedule.  It's retards like you
> 
> I already answered why. You didn't understand it, 

You don't understand security.  There is no reason to use
https on a simple info only site, period.  Police organizations
however make their living on security so if a sledgehammer
can be used to nail in trim a sledgehammer is the best
tool to nail in trim.  Cops are no smarter than your
garbagemen.  They just carry guns and can gun you down
like a dog  if they don't like you unless you're white.


> > who fuck up most everything in tech that is broken
> > nowadays.  And keep pushing your Windows bullshit
> > like the good little bitch that you have become.
> 
> Your grasp of how anything works is so dated and wrong I don't even know 
> where to start.

You don't know where to start because you're a retard.  And
no, I don't need the DTD line for browsers to understand
simple html code.

I understand how people can be Apple fanboys but you have to
be a complete and utter retard to fanboy for Windows.  Microsoft
likes their potted plants to stay retarded so you fit right
in.  Maybe it's a sense of belonging and acceptance you thrive.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3528

On 6/22/16 6:08 PM, Crawford Sausage Company wrote:

> You don't understand security.  There is no reason to use
> https on a simple info only site, period.  Police organizations
> however make their living on security so if a sledgehammer
> can be used to nail in trim a sledgehammer is the best
> tool to nail in trim.  Cops are no smarter than your
> garbagemen.  They just carry guns and can gun you down
> like a dog  if they don't like you unless you're white.

If you honestly think a single badged officer of the CPD has or has ever 
had the slightest thing to do with any aspect of the CPD website, you're 
every bit the moron CL is painting you out to be and thensome.

Way to also have the completely non-sniffing-based justification for 
using https on a time-sensitive content site go right the fuck over your 
head, un-comprehended, as well.

-- 
smr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3529

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:10:02 PM UTC-5, smr wrote:

> Way to also have the completely non-sniffing-based justification for 
> using https on a time-sensitive content site go right the fuck over your 
> head, un-comprehended, as well.

Please spell it out how a simple CAPS schedule is so
"time sensitive."  Jarheads at CPD must have
had input on that site because the rest of the city's
sites seem to not give out that error.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3530

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:36:28 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> 
>> I decided to lookup the next caps beat meetings and came across this page
>> 
>> https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communities/Districts/District12/Events
>> 
>> looks pretty straight foward to me. 
> 
> Here's what I got:
> ----
> Secure Connection Failed
> 
> The connection to portal.chicagopolice.org was interrupted while the page was loading.
> 
>     The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
>     Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.
> ----------
> 
> You're retarded.

Sounds like you're using a shitty browser with non-standard and made up 
error messages. Ever think about that?

>> > Who gives a flying fuck if someone is snooping on your
>> > viewing a public schedule.  It's retards like you
>> 
>> I already answered why. You didn't understand it, 
> 
> You don't understand security.  There is no reason to use
> https on a simple info only site, period.  Police organizations
> however make their living on security so if a sledgehammer
> can be used to nail in trim a sledgehammer is the best
> tool to nail in trim.  Cops are no smarter than your
> garbagemen.  They just carry guns and can gun you down
> like a dog  if they don't like you unless you're white.

Wait, you understand security, but can't even view a website without 
getting stopped dead in your tracks because you use a shitty, defective 
web browser? That's pretty amazing.

>> > who fuck up most everything in tech that is broken
>> > nowadays.  And keep pushing your Windows bullshit
>> > like the good little bitch that you have become.
>> 
>> Your grasp of how anything works is so dated and wrong I don't even know 
>> where to start.
> 
> You don't know where to start because you're a retard.  And
> no, I don't need the DTD line for browsers to understand
> simple html code.

Your browser (the one YOU installed) can't understand a calendar on a 
dusty-ass city-run website. Then you throw a tantrum about apple, 
microsoft and the kitchen sink because you made a stupid decision and 
can't deal with it.

> I understand how people can be Apple fanboys but you have to
> be a complete and utter retard to fanboy for Windows.  Microsoft
> likes their potted plants to stay retarded so you fit right
> in.  Maybe it's a sense of belonging and acceptance you thrive.

What does windows have to do with any of your little problems, other than 
nothing at all?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3531

Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:36:28 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:

>> I decided to lookup the next caps beat meetings and came across this page
>> 
>> https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communities/Districts/District12/Events
>> 
>> looks pretty straight foward to me. 

> Here's what I got:
> ----
> Secure Connection Failed


It still seems to be something anal with Firefox.

Only guess I have is it doesn't like wildcarded certificates.

It looks like chicagopolice.org is using a certificate issued to:

*.chicagopolice.org

which that * means "any match".

Normally when you get a cert, it's issued for the common name, like
portal.chicagopolice.org and if they wanted another one for like
meetings.chicagopolice.org, that would be another cert issued for that name.

If you have the money and a system that warrants it, you can purchase a
wildcarded cert which as long as it's "something".chicagopolice.org, the one
wildcarded certificate would work.

Only thing I can think of why Firefox wouldn't like it is because they are a
bit more of a security nightmare. Like on ripco, we have one cert for
webmail.ripco.com and a different one for email.ripco.com. If someone broke
in or did an exploit where they got a copy of the servers private key, they
would be able to mimick a server to validate itself as being real.

But only for that machine (webmail or email.ripco.com).

With the wildcard certificate, if any of the machines using it can be
exploited to get the server key, you can create new ones like
ripco.chicagopolice.org or brandylion.chicagopolice.org and that cert would
work for those just fine.

I dunno, my theory for the day.

-bruce
bje@ripco.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3532

Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
> Crawford Sausage Company <mea@brandylion.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:36:28 PM UTC-5, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> 
>>> I decided to lookup the next caps beat meetings and came across this page
>>> 
>>> https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/Communities/Districts/District12/Events
>>> 
>>> looks pretty straight foward to me. 
> 
>> Here's what I got:
>> ----
>> Secure Connection Failed
> 
> 
> It still seems to be something anal with Firefox.
> 
> Only guess I have is it doesn't like wildcarded certificates.

It's likely to be something with ciphers and those stupid acadamic 
exploits in all caps like WHOLE, SLAMMER or SLAYER. The problem is nobody 
really gives a fuck either way and the error messages generated by firefox 
are 1) meaningless 2) stupid 3) try to shift "blame" somewhere else.

The correct message firefox should display on a site like that is show the 
fucking content or if you need an error state

- we're completely fucking retarded and you are too for using this broken 
browser.

> It looks like chicagopolice.org is using a certificate issued to:
> 
> *.chicagopolice.org
> 
> which that * means "any match".
> 
> Normally when you get a cert, it's issued for the common name, like
> portal.chicagopolice.org and if they wanted another one for like
> meetings.chicagopolice.org, that would be another cert issued for that name.

commercial wildcards are pretty dumb. They even cap them too. If you want 
say 10 subdomains of *.whatever.biz you have to pay for that, and then pay 
more if you want 50 subdomains of that. Not sure how they count them 
though, or if it's some type of honesty deal when you deal with a ripoff 
cert provider.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | chi.internet

csiph-web