IE 7 says Scobleizer “not secure”
Juha Saarinen notices that IE 7 says that my blog is not secure. Is it my bad breath? My egotistical rantings? My attempt at defining the undefinable. Speaking of which a bird has been leaving a blog on my windshield lately. How do I know it’s a blog? It’s in reverse-chronilogical order (newest “post” is on top of the older “post”). Oh, and it is even publicly-discoverable. I can even permalink to it, if I had a Flickr photo of it. It must be a blog, right?
But, back to IE 7, not sure why I’m not secure. I’ll try to fix something on my side, if there’s something I’m doing wrong.
Powered By 
August 22nd, 2006 at 9:50 pm
I don’t get that error with IE7 on MY end. But who’s to say. Firefox is show in 2 more recent posts than IE 7 right now. Maybe it doesn’t read as quick either.
August 22nd, 2006 at 10:21 pm
OK, this is going to be embarrassing, but… even though I checked the source on the page, I missed it.
I loaded an HTTPS version of Scobleizer, but that page had some elements served over HTTP. So, IE7 told me the page had “non-secure” items in it, and refused to serve’em up.
So, in summary:
1) IE7 was right to refuse to display all the page.
2) I’m a n00b for missing the obvious.
3) Scoble’s a n00b too for mixing HTTP with HTTPS :).
4) Microsoft’s IE7 team really, really, really should come up with error messages that tell you exactly what the hell’s going on.
Fixed blog post on this subject coming up in a moment.
August 22nd, 2006 at 10:24 pm
I wrote a post on obtaining free software from Microsoft. IE7 thought it was a phishing site. Besides the comment fields asking for a name, email, and URL - I was in no way collecting personal information.
I determined the process of getting Microsoft to exempt my URL was not worth the trouble.
August 22nd, 2006 at 10:29 pm
Solved: mystery of IE7 declaring Scobleizer ‘non-secure’
A while a go, I was doing just one too many things at the same time. It was reading Robert Scoble's blog while trying to meet deadlines, talking on the phone, etc. Not conducive to for detailed troubleshooting that. Anyway, I saw this page on Scobl…
August 22nd, 2006 at 11:34 pm
David: just checked with IE7beta3, and yep… you da phisher man. Well, your site is suspicious, says IE7. I wont hand over my personal information to you then. :)
False positives like these could have some interesting ramifications for Microsoft. Not the first one I’ve heard of either.
August 23rd, 2006 at 1:41 am
Funny! But bitter! But funny! ;)
August 23rd, 2006 at 4:12 am
Maybe IE7 suspects your ‘naked conversations’ :D
August 23rd, 2006 at 7:59 am
[...] Last night Scoble was told that his blog was “not secure” by IE7 standards. Turns out the page was just being viewed as https, instead of http. [...]
August 23rd, 2006 at 8:00 am
I am not that doo doo bird.
August 23rd, 2006 at 9:57 am
In IE6 for me, It’s the way the amazon.com ad for the book is handled. The Barnes & Noble image doesn’t have the problem.
I get one warning per image on pages that have lots of amazon.com ads/referrer links, mostly because amazon.com is on my trusted site list and this blog isn’t. I guess it is time to take them off of my trusted site list and see if their scripts all still work.
- Dennis
August 23rd, 2006 at 10:03 am
Well, removing the trusted site designation from the non-HTTPS amazon.com URLs got rid of the unknown (mixed) designation. I don’t see https fetches for the blog page, but posting a comment does generate some https action.
By the way, although I don’t get a warning message now, I do get the little stop sign in the status bar, and my browser has blocked three cookies from amazon.com.
It annoys me when sites that I am not accessing directly put cookies on my system because they use fetched images to do it. (My blog does that to its visitors because I must show the blogger icon and Google happily drops cookies on all visitors who accept them.) So I can’t write an honest privacy statement for my blog, which is on my own web site. Ick.
August 23rd, 2006 at 1:13 pm
David Brunelle, did you report your “phishing” problem to the IE team? After all, that’s what betas are for, to get bug reports from scenarios in the field so the problems can be addressed.