I've been trying for a while to find a better FREE web server than the on I
have.
My old site https://leroyspovstuff.yolasite.com/ is limited to only 2 pages and
I had to rewrite everything to fit on it.

My new web site https://leroyw.byethost15.com/ is still under construction.

I'm getting this sometime on some of my pages.
 Your connection is not secure
The owner of leroyw.byethost15.com has configured their website improperly. To
protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this
website.

I would appreciate any feed back of any one who would visit my site.
Thanks!
and Have Fun!

Post a reply to this message

hi,

"Leroy" <whe### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> My new web site https://leroyw.byethost15.com/ is still under construction.
>
> I'm getting this sometime on some of my pages.
>  Your connection is not secure
> The owner of leroyw.byethost15.com has configured their website improperly. To
> protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this
> website.
>
> I would appreciate any feed back of any one who would visit my site.

I also get a "not secure" type message, specific error:
NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID.

as for first impressions, mine was feeling old.  :-)  the animated elements



regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/20/19 6:05 PM, jr wrote:

Sorry, there's no agreement in place that allows you to use that.

-- 
dik
Rendered 1024 of 921600 pixels (0%)

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:15:32 -0500, dick balaska wrote:

> On 2/20/19 6:05 PM, jr wrote:
>>  €0.02
> Sorry, there's no agreement in place that allows you to use that.

LOL

As jr noted, the self-signed certificate throws a warning (and will in 
most modern browsers).  Getting something like a Letsencrypt certificate 
in place would resolve that, assuming you can modify the certificate in 
use.

There's a definite 'retro' vibe to it.

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

hi,

dick balaska <dic### [at] buckosoftcom> wrote:
> On 2/20/19 6:05 PM, jr wrote:

> Sorry, there's no agreement in place that allows you to use that.

but there is, for another 30-odd days.  ;-)  thereafter, barter, maybe?!


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

Thanks for all the replies!

I found a real quick fix drop the S from the https in the address
 https://leroyw.byethost15.com/

My server gave me the certified address.
And I have frames and wrote all those sub pages with lots of directories to hold
stuff.
 It seem that the certificate doesn't transfer well from the frames.

Well now back to work, Got clean up the site.

Thank again!

Post a reply to this message

On 2/21/19 6:05 PM, Leroy wrote:
>  It seem that the certificate doesn't transfer well from the frames.

You cannot transfer certificates.  That would be a Really Bad Thing.
(The innernet is barely holding together as it is)

-- 
dik
Rendered 1024 of 921600 pixels (0%)

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:05:29 -0500, Leroy wrote:

> Thanks for all the replies!
> 
> I found a real quick fix drop the S from the https in the address
>  https://leroyw.byethost15.com/
> 
> My server gave me the certified address.
> And I have frames and wrote all those sub pages with lots of directories
> to hold stuff.
>  It seem that the certificate doesn't transfer well from the frames.
> 
> Well now back to work, Got clean up the site.
> 
> Thank again!

Yeah, not using https would work, but your connection won't be encrypted.

It's not a frame issue, though - you'd get a different message if you 
were serving up unencrypted data and encrypted data with the connection.

Ultimately, the problem with the certificate is that it's self-signed, 
and as such, untrusted.  SSL certificates work because they're issued by 
a trusted authority - self-signed certificates are placeholders intended 
to be replaced with a 'real' certificate with a valid chain of trust and 
encryption keys that are unique (many self-signed certificates are 
distributed with the web server, and are not unique or tied to the 
external hostname).



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 2/22/2019 1:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:05:29 -0500, Leroy wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for all the replies!
>>
>> I found a real quick fix drop the S from the https in the address
>>   https://leroyw.byethost15.com/
>>
>> My server gave me the certified address.
>> And I have frames and wrote all those sub pages with lots of directories
>> to hold stuff.
>>   It seem that the certificate doesn't transfer well from the frames.
>>
>> Well now back to work, Got clean up the site.
>>
>> Thank again!
> 
> Yeah, not using https would work, but your connection won't be encrypted.
> 
> It's not a frame issue, though - you'd get a different message if you
> were serving up unencrypted data and encrypted data with the connection.
> 
> Ultimately, the problem with the certificate is that it's self-signed,
> and as such, untrusted.  SSL certificates work because they're issued by
> a trusted authority - self-signed certificates are placeholders intended
> to be replaced with a 'real' certificate with a valid chain of trust and
> encryption keys that are unique (many self-signed certificates are
> distributed with the web server, and are not unique or tied to the
> external hostname).
> 
> 
> 

I will need to do SSL soon too unless I don't care if Google Chrome 
users can no longer access my site.


Mike

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:05:29 -0500, Leroy wrote:
>
> Yeah, not using https would work, but your connection won't be encrypted.
>
That's OK with me. I don't plan on asking or giving personal information there!

> It's not a frame issue, though - you'd get a different message if you
> were serving up unencrypted data and encrypted data with the connection.
>
> Ultimately, the problem with the certificate is that it's self-signed,
> and as such, untrusted.  SSL certificates work because they're issued by
> a trusted authority - self-signed certificates are placeholders intended
> to be replaced with a 'real' certificate with a valid chain of trust and
> encryption keys that are unique (many self-signed certificates are
> distributed with the web server, and are not unique or tied to the
> external hostname).
>

Nice to know!

>
> --
> "I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
> besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Poor Pig! No one to wrestle with!?

Post a reply to this message