Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 



~♥Aiko♥Chan♥~

List of working Web Browsers on Windows 9x

Recommended Posts


loblo    23
3 hours ago, Nomen said:

What encryption protocals are in current (if rare) use on websites that are not present or available on browsers such as FF2 or Opera 12.02?

I'm seeing the occasional "Secure connection: fatal error (40) from server.  Failed to connect to server. The reason may be that the encryption methods supported by the server are not enabled in the security preferences." message when browsing some links using Opera 12, and I have enabled all protocals that are possible in Opera settings.  I was trying to bring up a page located at https://www.sciencedaily.com/ and I'm not able to.  Why are these sites doing this?  They're not a bank or some other site where personal info or a financial service is going to be transacted - so why are they using presumably some high-powered or exotic encryption protocal that not even the default install of Opera 12.02 is compatible with?

Is there any way to know what exact protocal is required to access these sites when this message gets thrown?

Is there any way to add or incorporate an update or set of files to bestow these missing protocals on Opera 12.02 or FF2?

 

Best and only solution I know is to use Burp Suite Free Edition as a proxy and all SSL/TLS connection errors will be gone. Burp requires Java JRE 7 and to fully work also requires JRE cryptography jars to be updated to those supporting unlimited key strength.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Other-Internet-Related/Burp-Suite.shtml

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jce-7-download-432124.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nomen    15

I'm looking at the differences between opera 12.02 and 12.18.  Everything seems to be contained to opera.exe and opera.dll.  I can swap the new opera.exe for the old one and it Opera runs just fine (I'm posting this right now doing that).  But neither the new or the old opera.exe runs when I swap in the newer opera.dll.  I'm looking at both the dll's using dependency walker, and the old dll has problems in 5 modules - but obviously not bad enough to prevent it from running on win-98/kex.

The newer dll has problems with 9 modules, the additional ones being secur32.dll, user32.dll, gdi32.dll, and iphlpapi.jmp (?).

Would I / we get anywhere seeing if these functions can be patched with a kex stub?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaclaz    944
6 hours ago, Nomen said:

I'm looking at the differences between opera 12.02 and 12.18.  Everything seems to be contained to opera.exe and opera.dll.  I can swap the new opera.exe for the old one and it Opera runs just fine (I'm posting this right now doing that).  But neither the new or the old opera.exe runs when I swap in the newer opera.dll.  I'm looking at both the dll's using dependency walker, and the old dll has problems in 5 modules - but obviously not bad enough to prevent it from running on win-98/kex.

The newer dll has problems with 9 modules, the additional ones being secur32.dll, user32.dll, gdi32.dll, and iphlpapi.jmp (?).

Would I / we get anywhere seeing if these functions can be patched with a kex stub?

 

No idea, but if you are looking to find out what makes the difference you should "diff" 12.18 against 12.17 first, as the 12.18 should only contain the *whatever* adds the ECC compatibility on https.

jaclaz
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nomen    15

According to https://www.ghacks.net/2016/02/16/surprise-opera-12-18-has-been-released/ and https://blogs.opera.com/security/2016/02/opera-12-and-opera-mail-security-update/

" They removed a few protocols that are considered unsafe, added some which were not in 12.17. and enabled TLS 1.1 and 1.2 by default."

 " The most important change is the support for ECC cipher suites used in secure connections. Another addition is GCM. Opera 12 now supports the same set of ciphers as other modern browsers. We have seen that many domains are relying on ECC certificates, thus making Opera 12 unable to connect. Similarly most clients using TLS have deprecated RC4 from the list of secure ciphers. We have done the same in this update. There is a setting to turn it back on, in case you need it. Since more servers are supporting TLS 1.2, we have enabled that by default."

Someone posted a screen-shot of the security-protocal window for 12.18 here:

security-protocols-opera-12.18.jpg

ok, I see some new ciphers, looks like anything with ECDHE is new.
I'm going to compare opera.dll from version 12.17 to 12.18 and see what's different.  On a side note, I don't know if there's anything different about the msfn site, or if this is a side-effect of using opera.exe version 12.18, but when editing a post (like I'm doing now) I can see the "save" button, and I no longer get a prompt to download the zero-byte "default" file when posting.
 

Edited by Nomen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nomen    15
Okay, I tried a couple of things (on a system running XP):
    - Tried using LibCheck.exe - however it crashed. I'm not sure why.
    - Used Dependency walker and exported all the Exports and Imports data into corresponding .txt files for the two versions of opera.dll (2.17 and 2.18)

 
Then used WinMerge to compare the txt files to see the differences in the DLLs. It seems that things just moved around. The added functionally to the 2.18 DLL is likely in internal (i.e. not exported, non-public) functions in the 2.18 DLL.  The 2.18 dll is about 300 kb larger than the 2.17 dll.



 

Edited by Nomen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wunderbar98    4

Back to some Windows 98 fun, refreshingly simple, life support for anyone requiring a fully functional browser. Windows XP or a lean Linux install probably the way to go. Tried lots of browsers, adding a couple more to the list.

The only way i was able to create this forum account from a Windows 98 machine, properly loading the security Captcha, was with KernelEx and Firefox 7. No browser tested, with/out KernelEx, allowed a successfully Hotmail login to activate the account.

General observations, most commented on earlier:
* IE 5 and 6 unstable, no longer useful or secure, future Windows 98 installs won't bother upgrading IE.
* Firefox 2, favourite without KernelEx, losing functionality, lots of CA issues.
* Firefox 10 ESR with KernelEx, sluggish, frequent 'not responding', lack of bookmark functionality.
* Firefox 7.0.1 with KernelEx, probably best combination for anyone needing a 'mostly' functional browser, lack of bookmark functionality.
* K-Meleon 1.5.4 without KernelEx, maybe most likely to succeed with an enthusiastic developer to keep an up to date browser alive in Windows 98.
* SeaMonkey 1.1.18 without KernelEx (think 1.1.19 latest supported), pretty good, my favourite full featured browser in Linux (v 2.46), limited like Firefox 2.
* Opera without KernelEx, can't remember version tested, not too bad, not an Opera fan.

Haven't used Flash in years, not tested or desired. For those who want YouTube etc, lean Linux with MPlayer and SMTube probably the way to go. I wrote a Bash script that uses youtube-dl and player of choice (MPlayer, VLC) to search, stream and/or download from YouTube and other supported sites through a user-friendly terminal interface, including video description, number of views, playlist browsing, bookmarks, youtube-dl updater. Best way i've found for multimedia on old hardware.

New additions:
* Dillo v3.0 without KernelEx, no JavaScript, poor rendering of many sites but simple, stable and possibly the most secure of the bunch. Illegal operation crash on first run after boot, re-launch and then Dillo runs fine.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/dillo-win32/
* Links v2.1 text-browser without KernelEx, no JavaScript or images, ran well.
http://links.twibright.com/download/binaries/win32/

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wunderbar98    4

Having used a couple Windows 98 installs online in 2017 for several weeks, my favourite go-to browser was definitely Dillo without KernelEx. Very fast, no javascipt/security issues. Any sensitive or full featured browsing/computing will now need to be done with a more modern OS anyway, IMO a lean Linux or BSD install. Unfortunately this forum is not Dillo friendly for login.

Dillo functionality tips on the modern (broken and bloated) web:
* Dillo renders most modern webpages poorly, rely on up/down keys to reduce scrolling
* When heavy JavaScript sites don't display desired content:
- Selecting the 'Cached' link from Google search results instead
- Or paste the article title into a new search, often several sites host the same data, some don't need JavaScript.

Windows 98 is not optimized for DSL/ethernet out-of-the-box. Can't remember the exact numbers, running TCP Optimizer (TCPOptimizer_v308.exe) resulted in an ~7-10x improvement of data throughput.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jassenna    0

On page 3 of this thread, sdfox7 said:

--> You can use a browser on unmodified Windows 98SE, open about:config,
--> then create string general.useragent.override, and use Mozilla/5.0
--> (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 9_3_5 like Mac OS X)

Is there a way to make this impersonation in some sites, but not on others,
without editing about:config each time (e.g. "use modified useragent string
for sites in this list..." )?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×