Page 1 of 1

yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 3:19 am
by dancaer69
I suddenly have problems with yahoo mail which doesn't load any more and I get the following error:
NET::ERR_CERTIFICATE_TRANSPARENCY_REQUIRED
I found a thread about this problem here:
https://forums.yahoo.net/t5/Errors/NET- ... d-p/141922

and seems that is a problem with chrome 53 version and there is an update available. Is this affect slimjet too? Is there any update to fix it? I installed today the latest version for linux but the error still remains. I also read in google forums that this affects all sites which using symantec certification.
Also this error doesn't appear on google chrome(v 54) and I can login to yahoo mail without problems.

Re: yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 4:52 am
by atari800
Follow this thread ....

Re: yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 6:46 am
by dancaer69
I didn't see any solution there and it seems to me that is not going to be fixed any time soon. The thread you point me is almost a year old. So I think I will return to google chrome.

Re: yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:53 am
by Ontario Canada
This thread:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1310

is about the issue, and yes, you will need to use another browser until fixed.

It's not just Yahoo mail, my bank and Amazon have the same problem - but ONLY with Slimjet.

Re: yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:35 am
by atari800
Nope not a year old
"Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:29 pm"

and yes there is no fix yet
and yes use another browser for the mean time

Re: yahoo mail error: connection isn't private

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:34 pm
by Ontario Canada
atari800 wrote:Nope not a year old
"Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:29 pm"

and yes there is no fix yet
and yes use another browser for the mean time
LOL. I thought that dancaer69 had seen another thread about a similar issue from a year ago - I should have looked at your link before I pointed to the same thread. :oops: