PaleMoon 25 coming to Linux

[branwerks]

I can't get into amazon music library. Moot point now.

Thank you for the suggested link, and from there:

"Thanks for the reply. You are absolutely correct. Reducing the min security to SSL 3.0 allowed the page to load. This is the site for my banking, so is strange that they are so behind the times. I have IE Tab extension installed, so will just use it for accessing this site and leave the security settings at TLS. I will talk to my bank about it.
Thanks again"

So it's not just me, but it's no consolation.My credit union strikes again, and talking with them will yield no results, I've been down that roas too many times. At any rate, I will go ahead and try the Pale Moon Commander Extension as I am on Linux and in a galaxy far,far away from ie tab or anyting of the like.

[troypulk]

I forgot to mention, and apparently this needs mentioning - I'm new to this and trying to hang in there. Answers like "do some troubleshooting" without SOME detail or direction aren't really helping me out. Pale Moon "point" releases are fixes for site compatibility issues, which is exactly what I have going on. ALL other browsers I use or try aren't having any problems opening pages so I don't think the work nneding to be done is on my end.

Sorry, I was assuming you were not new.

[Moonchild]

The secure connections issue is less of a problem in Firefox and Chrome because they employ a "last resort" fallback method by pretending to support a lower "highest protocol version" and simply do a dumb retry over and over at lower and lower security levels, without any sort of indication of this to the user.

I do understand that from a user point of view, it may seem that "Pale Moon has a problem" because the bottom line is that you can't connect with it and you can with other browsers, despite the fact that it's a server issue (other browsers work around this type of server configuration and never inform the user that there is a problem, so the problem never gets addressed by the server operators since it's usually not even known as a result of this "silent retrying").

Off-topic:
In fact, the IETF is currently working on a "workaround for this dumb retry workaround" in terms of SCSV, which should not at all be needed (and is a moot point, but that's very much off-topic for this thread so I won't elaborate).