It is the policy of Antagonism not to allow access to any resource on antagonism.org with Internet Explorer. Any attempt to access a resource on this site with Interent Explorer will result in the user being redirected to this page.
Internet Explorer is not secure, plain and simple. Microsoft never built Internet Explorer with the intention of it being secure. As a direct result, Internet Explorer became a vector for all types of malicious behavior: virus distribution, remote code execution, denial of services, trojan installation, spyware/adware installation and phishing. The most recognizable sign of damage caused by Internet Explorer's poor coding is the reduction of machines's speed to rival a glacier and the assortment of software no one remembers installing.
Due to the fact, Microsoft keeps Internet Explorer under a closed source license, they are the only ones capable of making Internet Explorer secure. However, due to lack of a major uproar from Microsoft's customer base regarding Internet Explorer security, Microsoft is unlikely to repair Interenet Explorer. Adding to this, the task would result in a massive undertaking as since Microsoft never coded Internet Explorer for security, it would involve a code audit and a complete rewrite.
Below is a list of third party articles seconding the above assessment of Internet Explorer.
Based on Internet Explorer's repeatedly proven reputation as a security disaster, I decided to take a stand and not allow Internet Explorer to access any of the pages of antagonism.org. It is my sincerest hope this will increase awareness of the problems of Internet Explorer, encouraging people to move to different, more secure browsers. As stated above any attempt to access antagonism.org by Internet Explorer will result in an automatic redirection to this page.
I listed below several alternatives for people using Internet Explorer. This list centers around browsers which run on Windows. The reason for this is Internet Explorer does not run on platforms outside of Windows and Mac OS, Microsoft stopped support of Internet Explorer for Mac OS and Apple ships and actively promotes its flagship browser. Although Safari is available on Windows, I choose to leave it off the list as it is in beta. If I receive enough requests, I will add non Windows alternatives.
Firefox is the browser du jour and my browser of choice. It is truly cross platform (no, this does not mean it runs on multiple versions of Windows). It runs on BSD, Linux, Mac OS X, Solaris and Windows. It is free as in beer (total cost, $0) and free as in speech. The latter means that if you possess the desire and the ability, you can modify it however you want. It blocks popups by default, has tabbed browsing (the ability to view multiple pages in one window) and can incorporate all manner of extensions. Extensions are the true beauty of Firefox. They expand the functionality of Firefox. There are extensions to block ads, patch Windows without Internet Explorer, expand the Google toolbar, check the weather and much more.
Mozilla is the predecessor to Firefox. It will probably look familiar to some people. It is the open source version of what is known as Netscape. Along with a web browser, it includes a mail reader, a web page composer and an IRC client. Like Firefox, it provides popup-blocking, tabbed browsing and extension support.
I have not used Opera. The main reason was because until recently Opera was not free unless you wanted to deal with advertisements. Thanks to Google and Opera putting them first in their search engine preference, the ads are gone. Opera has a reputation for being the fastest browser.
As mentioned previously, it is the policy of Antagonism to redirect any access to resources on antagonism.org from Internet Explorer. The server believes you attempted to access a resource using Internet Explorer and therefore redirected you here.
The response below is a direct quotation from John Simpson. John runs a similar page In fact, John's page helped provide the inspiration for this page.
"You should no longer be forced to see this page
if you're using Opera. What made me change my mind, you may ask? My friend's
cell phone has Opera embedded as the browser, and no way to change the agent
string. I hadn't realized that some Opera installs didn't have an easy way
to change the agent string, or any way to access the "opera.ini" file to change
it by hand. Hint to Opera developers this would be helpful if it could be
remedied.
For those who do have access to their "opera.ini" file, find the line which
starts with Spoof UserAgent ID=, and change the existing value (which
will be either 3 or 5) to 1. What this value means:
1=Opera, 2=Mozilla, 3=IE, 4=Mozilla without mentioning Opera, 5=IE
without mentioning Opera. If you choose Mozilla, there will be a
Spoof Version Code= line next to it. That value will be 0 for
Mozilla (Netscape 5.0 and higher), 1 for Netscape 4.78, or 2 for
Netscape 3.0.
I have included the below from a friend who has a similar setup for
informational purposes. Please note that while he posseses remarkable self
restraint, I have tendency to let my fiery Irish temper and sharp tongue get
the better of me. I also have no problem posting the entire conversation to my
site to make sure everyone gets the whole story.
2005-12-22 Not eight hours after making the change to allow
Opera to view the site, I got an email from some AOL LOSER who called me a liar
(among other names), and then eventually said that he's using Opera and still
can't view one of the pages. I guess you just can't please some people...
His message upset me so much that I couldn't think of a way to answer him
without lowering myself to his level, calling him names and so forth, so I
basically told him that because he was being such an immature prick, I simply
didn't want to answer him- even though I knew what the problem was.
However, given the issue involved, I can see this being a problem for others,
so here's the secret- AOL SUCKS. Their desktop software works by creating a VPN
(virtual private network) into AOL's internal network, and then forcibly
redirecting all of your machine's network traffic through their network. Part
of their internal network is a set of web proxy servers, which capture every
web page request, make the same request to the real web server, and return
whatever the web server sent back to the original client- but also keeping a
copy for itself, so that if another client (another AOL user) happens to
request the same page, the proxy server returns a copy of the page without
consulting the real web server.
This means that AOL's proxy servers are full of copies of the results from the
first time each user accessed a given page. And since 99.999% of AOL users are
also using IE, guess what AOL's cache is full of...that's right, it's full of
redirects to the page you're reading right now.
So basically, AOL users are being forced to see this page even though they may
be running a real browser- and because these cached copies of the pages are
returned to AOL users without my server being consulted, there's nothing I can
do to fix it without removing the IE block entirely- and that's not an option.
If you're one of the rare few who use AOL but know enough to use another
browser, all I can suggest is that you complain to AOL. Maybe they have some
setting you can use to bypass their web proxies... or if you have a real ISP
that you use to reach AOL's servers, try running your real browser while you
are connected to the ISP but not running any AOL software.
And for "wonder boy" with the magical spelling monkey (the AOL idiot who sent
me the email)... seriously, dude. Learn how to act like a professional when you
contact strangers on the Internet. If you act like an immature 15 year old punk
kid, that's how people are going to treat you. (No insult intended to 15 year
olds, by the way... unless you also have a habit of calling total strangers
names while asking them for help.)" [1]
For years, the security problems caused by Internet Explorer frustrated me. Unfortunately, until John Simpson's page inspired me, I focused only on fixing the problem with me. Now I spread the message regarding the security problems of Internet Explorer and do my best to encourage others to remove the source of the problem as well.
First, let me say thanks and welcome to the good fight. Previously, I set it up using Apache's mod_rewrite. My httpd.conf contains the following lines:
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} MSIE [NC]
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !Opera [NC]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !/ie.shtml
RewriteRule ^.* http://www.antagonism.org/ie.shtml
The idea is this:
THEN the browser's request will be transformed and the browser will be redirected to the result. In this case, the transformation is to replace the entire request ("^.*") with "http://www.antagonism.org/ie.shtml".
Recently, I moved from Apache to Nginx. Nginx requires a different approach to the redirect since it does not allow for nested if statements. Below is an example which will cause the redirect for Nginx.
# Internet Explorer Redirect Check
if ($http_user_agent ~* MSIE) {
set $ie 1;
}
if ($http_user_agent ~* Opera) {
set $ie 0;
}
if ($request_filename ~ /ie.shtml) {
set $ie 0;
}
# Implement Redirects
if ($ie ~ 1) {
rewrite ^(.*)$ http://www.antagonism.org/ie.shtml;
}
The idea is this:
THEN if $ie is equal to 1, the browser's request will be transformed and the browser will be redirected to the result. In this cse, the transformation is to replace the entire request ("^(.*)$") with "http://www.antagonism.org/ie.shtml".
No matter what page the browser requests, the browser is redirected here unless the request is here. The reason for exemption of this page is to avoid a "recursion loop" which can throw errors on your clients' browsers, chew up resources on your server or even cause a crash.
"Many programs- viruses, spyware, adware, and other types of "malware"- use the security holes in IE to take control of your machine. These programs could be doing anything- they could be mailing copies of themselves to everybody in your address book, they could be installing a program to let hackers and spammers remotely control your machine, they could be keeping a log of the web pages you view and the people you send and receive email with, they could be searching your hard drive for your private files and sending them off to who knows where... [2]
Service Pack 2 does not even come close to fixing the Internet Explorer problem. As stated before the security problems of Internet Explorer will require a complete code rewrite to remove and this did not happen with Service Pack 2 or any other Microsoft Service Pack. Rather they simply continue to bail water ignoring the fact their boat consists of windows screens. However, you do not have to take my word for it. Go to the Open Source Vulnerability Database and see how many unpatched holes still exist or stroll over to eEye's published and upcoming advisories and find out how long it truly takes Microsoft to fix a security vulnerability. Hopefully this knowledge will encourage you to use a different browser, so you can sleep better at night.
I do not just limit my ethusiasm to Linux, but instead include all Open Source software. This however does not mean I feel any desire to stick it to Microsft. I am a libertarian before anything else. I am perfectly content with Microsoft selling inferior software, since the market clearly dictates this is something the public wants. However it is not something I want. So I do everything in my power to discourage Internet Explorer's use. Note, I do not attempt to get Microsoft banned by government interference from selling Internet Explorer, Instead I try to convince enough people to shift the market away from Internet Explorer. This may be a hard concept for most people to understand, but I believe that this is the proper way.
While I will not go in depth with all that is wrong with that site, let's take a look at a several of the basic flaws with his approach. First, he states quite clearly,
"All Myths relate to running the default install of Firefox in Windows with no Extensions." [3]
However, two of myths directly deal with problems possibly caused by extensions. Four of his myths do not carry an example to site where he pulled them from and furthermore, most of his "examples" consist of one person or magazine's opinion rather than a full fledged myth. Lastly, his arguments regarding Firefox's security compared to Internet Explorer's are flawed at best and at worst outright falsehood. He cites the number of advisories for Firefox, noting it is higher than the number of ones for Internet Explorer. However, he fails to do any further research. There are several questions to ask: what is the likelihood of exploitation, what was the turnaround time from exploit release to patch, and what are the consquences of exploitation. In most cases, Microsoft finishes last in turnaround time (see eEye links above) and the result of exploitation is almost always remote code execution (read, bad guy now owns your machine). I invite you to read through the resources both he and I provided for both Internet Explorer and Firefox. Take a good long look at the following items, number and severity of unpatched vulnerabilities, general severity of all vulnerabilities and time to patch. I think that will provide you a better picture of who is a fan boy.
If you were using a different browser, you would be able to see my resume. I work extensively in various IT roles, particularly in network security. So yes, your choice of browser does affect me.
When your compromised machine pounds my mail server because a spammer is using it as an open relay, it affects me.
When your compromised machine is used as a springboard for attacks against my server and my clients networks, it affects me.
When your compromised machine is attempting to spread its infection and is clogging my ISP, it affects me.
When I get a call in the middle of the night because some clever script kiddie is attempting the IE exploit du jour, it affects me.
All the above, it takes me away from my friends, family, who I deeply love, and projects I'd rather do (read anything not involving IE). So please expand your vision and realize that your actions on the Internet affect a good many people.
Since I own MY content, the copyright and MY server, I am completely within my rights to restrict access as I see fit. I don't see you complaining that numerous sites force people to use Internet Explorer to view their content. More so, how do you think that affects Mac users who must use a version of Internet Explorer several versions old with no security fixes coming or Linux/BSD users for whom Internet Explorer is not a viable alternative?
I am well aware of the fact Google creates a cache of my site. They are more than welcome and able to because they access my site without Internet Explorer. They are more than welcome to serve the cached copy to whatever browser they want since it is their servers, not mine. My stated goal is to prevent people from accessing my server with Internet Explorer.
If you are happy with possible outdated copies of my site, you are more than welcome to pull my content from Google. Just understand that I respond to questions/compliants regarding cached copies of my site with a canned response, "Use a different browser".
I am sorry you feel that way. I sincerely hope you change your mind.