Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SP2 inhibits javascripted image swapping...

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
September 12, 2004 5:58:46 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Help!

I just installed SP2 via the automatic update system, accepted whatever
it's default settings were, and then found my own personal website no
longer works. Something in my underwater photo viewing page fires a
dire warning from the IE browser, on a newly installed "Information
Bar",claiming to protect my security it's stopped the file from
displaying active content. Clicking for more info, and telling it to
unblock the data gets an even more dire warning about active content
being dangerous.

At the moment I do not want to remove SP2, since the average computer
will inevitably get infected by it someday. I don't want to remove the
Info Bar so my site will work on my machine. It works in NN7.1, Opera,
and previous versions of IE5.0++. I can't get the average user to
ignore the dire warnings of the new SP2, I want to figure out why I'm
triggering its alarm.

My viewer is not a popup window. It merely replaces the SRC="xxx.jpg"
attribute portion of an IMAGE tag on the with another filename, upon
button select by the user, and then loads and displays the chosen
photo. It does NOT precache anything, since that would involved
downloading a lot of photos when the page itself is loaded, and it does
not create a new page, as that's not necessary. It just downloads a
jpeg file on user demand, via "onClick" of buttons. I don't
understand the danger.

I've removed the entire script from the HEAD of the document, and I
still get the warnings. Nothing is left except the HTML, with it's
onClick= "someFunction()" tags in various places. Any idea what
specifically is causing the new "Information Bar" to trigger it's
alert? Any ideas as to where to read about the security triggers of
SP2? Anyone else have this problem with javascript content?




Wade
Anonymous
September 12, 2004 12:53:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

No , The warning is a wakeup call that the web page is trying to download ,
ect active x,,you can toggle it and accept it and then it downloads it or
leave it alone and its blocked

"Wade G. Pemberton" wrote:

> Help!
>
> I just installed SP2 via the automatic update system, accepted whatever
> it's default settings were, and then found my own personal website no
> longer works. Something in my underwater photo viewing page fires a
> dire warning from the IE browser, on a newly installed "Information
> Bar",claiming to protect my security it's stopped the file from
> displaying active content. Clicking for more info, and telling it to
> unblock the data gets an even more dire warning about active content
> being dangerous.
>
> At the moment I do not want to remove SP2, since the average computer
> will inevitably get infected by it someday. I don't want to remove the
> Info Bar so my site will work on my machine. It works in NN7.1, Opera,
> and previous versions of IE5.0++. I can't get the average user to
> ignore the dire warnings of the new SP2, I want to figure out why I'm
> triggering its alarm.
>
> My viewer is not a popup window. It merely replaces the SRC="xxx.jpg"
> attribute portion of an IMAGE tag on the with another filename, upon
> button select by the user, and then loads and displays the chosen
> photo. It does NOT precache anything, since that would involved
> downloading a lot of photos when the page itself is loaded, and it does
> not create a new page, as that's not necessary. It just downloads a
> jpeg file on user demand, via "onClick" of buttons. I don't
> understand the danger.
>
> I've removed the entire script from the HEAD of the document, and I
> still get the warnings. Nothing is left except the HTML, with it's
> onClick= "someFunction()" tags in various places. Any idea what
> specifically is causing the new "Information Bar" to trigger it's
> alert? Any ideas as to where to read about the security triggers of
> SP2? Anyone else have this problem with javascript content?
>
>
>
>
> Wade
>
>
!