PasswordMaker Forums

Firefox/SeaMonkey/Mozilla/Netscape/Flock Browser Extension => Feature Requests / Enhancements => Topic started by: LkonKbd on April 01, 2006, 09:12:21 PM

Title: Paranoia problems . . .
Post by: LkonKbd on April 01, 2006, 09:12:21 PM

I am a very DUMMY when it comes to this web so here is my question.

I know my system sends info to the website I am connecting with.  When we receive data back is there a URL identifing the other end?  If so is there some way of recording this info, like in the "Notes" area for each time that URL is accessed?  Not a full addy each time, maybe a resetable counter to let us know how many times we have accessed that site since the last reset?  Then if there is a different site addy recorded we can request an investigation or turn the info over to the authorities.  

I have SpoofStick to perform this function, but; another as added insurance would be a GREAT benefit.  SpoofStick is not recording the number of times a specific site is accessed nor will it record a spoofed site.

P.S. Just noticed there is a dupped 'Smily' in the "Clickable Smilies" to the left of this message area.  The very first one and in that same column fourth one down.

Title: Paranoia problems . . .
Post by: Eric H. Jung on April 01, 2006, 11:09:30 PM

Hi LkonKbd,

I'm trying to keep PasswordMaker out of the anti-phishing/spoofing arena because there are already a number of excellent extensions for that. Thanks for the idea, though.

-Eric

Title: Paranoia problems . . .
Post by: tanstaafl on April 03, 2006, 01:42:45 PM

Although, I would say that simply making sure you have the full URL of the site in question in the 'When URL Contains' field will prevent a SUCCESSFUL spoof attempt, as the generated password will be different from your true Account password.

So, in effect, PWM DOES provide some anti-spoof functionality, though indirectly...

Title: Paranoia problems . . .
Post by: Eric H. Jung on April 03, 2006, 03:19:20 PM

Yep, I agree.

Title: Paranoia problems . . .
Post by: Romeo on April 03, 2006, 07:36:52 PM

Yes, indeed.  A while back, we had a lengthy discussion about the URL and the pieces making up a URL.