Home Forums Networks & Cross-Platform Networking Autofill

i got this message when trying to fill out a form online. I am always able to fill out a form and get my credit card info to fill in, which is what I was trying to do this time. But instead, I got t his message: Autofill Message

This was from Safari Tech Preview, but Firefox isn't nearly as efficient as Safari when it comes to filling stuff in. I always find it awkward. Same with their "find" feature. It has to be exact rather than a few letters unlike Safari which is much more intuitive.

I get that message occasionally also. As far as I can tell, it is related to how the website is designed, not something in Safari. I say that because, almost all the time, I have no issue with Autofill.

I have encountered sites that involve credit card information that will not even allow a paste of card info into the space/box, let alone autofill.

You know, I've encountered that too. Not necessarily with a credit card but sometimes with a code. I have to actually type it in.

Not to mention passwords.

A universal fix may be in the works. Apple teams up with Google, Mozilla, Microsoft to improve browser interoperability In the meantime, we'll have to deal with it.

I use DuckDuckGo. Does that leave me out?

DuckDuckGo is a search engine, not a browser. DDG is available from ANY browser.

Oh, right. Dumb mistake.

Any ETA for this fix?

I recently encountered a few web sites that have intentionally been designed to prevent autofill, usually accompanied with some variant of two-factor authentication. This is, of course, in the name of security. As government regulators tighten the reporting requirements for security breaches, autofill is a vulnerability that web developers will are held accountable for that is outside their control. Look for this trend to continue and become more intrusive. Another Old Friend I have encountered recently: accounts and/or passwords that expire and must be renewed at frequent intervals.


We already have interoperability standards, but technology is developing faster than the standards can keep up and are too often ignored or abused. I can envision the development team of the future consisting of three software developers, three people from the marketing department, and at least a dozen intellectual property attorneys. :grumble:

I have encountered recently: accounts and/or passwords that expire and must be renewed at frequent intervals.

I had a website do this (I think it was my bank but I can't remember), and every so often I had to change my password. It was really aggravating because I was not allowed to repeat any of them, so I had to keep a list which was getting longer and longer.

I know it's for security, but still aggravating.

Medicare.gov instituted an every 6 month password change rule a coupl'a years back, but it didn't last terribly long.

I wonder why?

More likely lots of seniors who had trouble with a permanent password and couldn't possibly be expected to deal with a new one every six months.

Whoever dreamed up the idea was a moron, and I wonder how many password resets they had to deal with before they realized that they'd created a monster?

By the way, the best way I've found to deal with the "can't be the same" password problem is to simply pick a particular character and change it by replacing it with the next one to the right/left on my keyboard, i.e. ! > @ > # > $, etc.

More likely lots of seniors who had trouble with a permanent password and couldn't possibly be expected to deal with a new one every six months. That's what I meant. It was aggravating. Thus the grouchiness.

Whoever dreamed up the idea was a moron, and I wonder how many password resets they had to deal with before they realized that they'd created a monster? Government, gotta love it. I wrote my congressman (woman) after all the warnings to seniors to "don't give out your social security number and don't carry the card because of identity theft." I told her it was unavoidable as that is the very number on Medicare Cards. It wasn't much longer after that those numbers changed to those crazy numbers you see now.

By the way, the best way I've found to deal with the "can't be the same" password problem is to simply pick a particular character and change it by replacing it with the next one to the right/left on my keyboard, i.e. ! > @ > # > $, etc. [/quote] That's a good idea.

Lucky timing. I railed about that for years before they got around to doing it.

But how about the fact that the ONLY financial document you ever get that's got your complete 9 digit SSN is your 1099 from SSA? joemike and I have had a back and forth or two about the formidable and complex task of changing to 111-22-xxxx, but Medicare's having gone one step further shoots down any counter-arguments.

I railed about that for years before they got around to doing it. Maybe you talked to the wrong person who could give a rip.

But how about the fact that the ONLY financial document you ever get that's got your complete 9 digit SSN is your 1099 from SSA? joemike and I have had a back and forth or two about the formidable and complex task of changing to 111-22-xxxx, but Medicare's having gone one step further shoots down any counter-arguments. [/quote] This I am not getting. Huh?

This I am not getting. Huh?

I mean if Medicare can change your entire number and maintain a complete cross-reference, how difficult could it be to change those final four digits to xxxx, which doesn't require ANY actual change to your SSN?

I didn't discuss it with any governmental type person, but I did raise the point with AARP more than once, and I can't imagine them not having taken it seriously.

I mean if Medicare can change your entire number and maintain a complete cross-reference, how difficult could it be to change those final four digits to xxxx, which doesn't require ANY actual change to your SSN? Again, government, gotta love it.

I didn't discuss it with any governmental type person, but I did raise the point with AARP more than once, and I can't imagine them not having taken it seriously. Well they didn't. AARP isn't involved with SS at all. It's not in their wheelhouse. You're sure trusting. They push things like the Hartford Insurance. Lots of seniors complaining about it. Said it's cheap at first but then goes way up and other problems I believe. It's been awhile since I read the complaints. They are out for the bucks. They push a lot of products and get kickbacks. They are not looking out for us. I've had that feeling for awhile now. I finally dropped them. Now I'm sounding like one of my negative friends.

For years, I returned AARP's solicitations with "Kindly keep your s**t out of my mailbox!" scrawled across them, but they didn't stop sending them until I personally insulted their president.

I think you are more cynical than I am trusting. AARP's thing is making you think you're old even if you're not, so you buy the "old people" stuff they sell, but they still must do at least minimal advocacy to keep looking relevant, and this is a really easy opportunity for them to look good with near zero effort and absolutely zero chance of negative feedback. I can't imagine that they haven't gotten considerable input on the issue - from retired accountants, if nobody else - and totally ignored it, although I can certainly see them not having made the major, ongoing lobbying effort that's called for, because it's simply not critical. That relevant they ain't!

I'm willing to bet, though, they were involved in Medicare's decision to change the numbers on our cards.

The blame for that is a federal statute passed by congress and signed into law probably fifty years ago, which forbade that e use of the social security number as an account identifier for anyone other than income taxes. The law was the result a growing national concern over information privacy and the fact that employers as well as the military, medical facilities, virtually everyone in the United States used the SSN as an identifying number. At the time, the task of converting all the SSNs, Medicare IDs, etc. was beyond the computational capacity of the time. (Think punched "Holerith cards") so congress granted Social Security and Medicare exemptions to the law (the military "work-around" was to add two alpha characters to the beginning or end of the SSN — which was obviously a joke). The computing technology necessary to the conversion has long been available, but the status quo reigned supreme until the issue of information privacy once again made it on the six o'clock news and the administration finally decided the SSN exemptions granted to social security, medicare, and the military were an open joke. So after half a century of non-compliance, the decision was made that all government agencies must abide by federal statute.

There is plenty of blame to go around for the long delayed change but it lies at the feet of Congress, the "fifth estate", and a compete lack of understanding about information security on the part of all but a relative few computer geeks. If you really feel the need to place blame you might start with Herman Hollerith, or a citizenry willing to tolerate the wink, wink complacent ignorance of congress.

COMMENT: I didn't know it was there, but you obviously touched a nerve I had not realized had been festering for half a century. But touch it you did! I have never been a fan of stupidity, and the exemptions were stupid then and were even more stupid because it took so long to recognize and — with today's technology — a relatively easy fix.

You'll probably know if it's fact or fiction, but I've read that when Bell Labs/AT&T first designed the phone systems still in use in much of the world, they specified three strand wire - one strand more than was/still is, actually, necessary for telephony - because they anticipated the eventual need for an additional strand.

The government has never been blessed with such foresight.

True! In a previous career I worked as a central office foreman for GTE. The extra strand in cables was often used when there were problems on either of the other two in the triad. I was in an old step-by-step office with mechanical switching and every phone connected by what started out as a single unique physical copper connection. That is how it started out, not what I found when I took the job. I saw copper wire junction boxes with more patches and jumpers than in the original cables after years of patching and field engineering. I was blessed by having a crew of well seasoned old hands that somehow managed to catch things together, even if it meant running a single jumper wire to another junction box blocks or even miles away, most (all?) of them are long retired and few of their replacements even know how to make reliable copper wire connections.

By-the-way, that wire system "still in use in the rest of the world" would be totally overwhelmed in the communications environment of today's "western" world. You may still have a copper pair running to your house, but unless you are in a deep rural area, that old step-by-step environment was long ago replaced by by a computer and fiber optic to neighborhood switching centers. Parts are no longer available for the old mechanical switches and copper is too expensive for new service connections.

I'm in the unusual position of having Fios service and no cell phone, so I've often thought about the possibility of my Fios going down and leaving me incommunicado (or, alternatively, walking around the neighborhood with my MBP looking for a hot spot), and this thread inspired me to finally call Verizon to see if I could perhaps switch just my phone service back to copper wire to eliminate my vulnerability.

Unfortunately, I was advised that it's impossible for me to revert to copper, but during the course of the conversation I was also advised of a change in Verizon's offerings (which I feel I should have been advised of 2 years ago) which has enabled me to reformat my plan with a monthly savings of $13 plus a so far indeterminate tax decrease while at the same time having my Internet service upgraded from 100/100 to 300/300...a giant win, even if not what I was looking for.

In view of that, dinner's on me next time you're in NY.

Copper and land-line[i] are becoming the [i]buggy whip of telecommunications and we have never had FIOS to the house available. The principal telephone provider in the area, AT&T, is installing antennae such as this one every few blocks. It is my understanding that when the system is turned on it will provide cellular connections to replace the existing copper telephone network, as well as internet and "cable" TV connectivity. The towers in turn are connected to the network via fiber optic. I will be surprised if they don't salvage the existing copper network soon after that. There is a lot of expensive and increasingly unused copper hanging from those poles.

If I am ever in New York, I will take you up on the offer of a meal!

Looking forward to meeting both of you in person!