Comment 57 for bug 44062

(In reply to comment #52)
> (In reply to comment #51)
> > (In reply to comment #50)
> > Forgive me... but isn't that the point of much of the discussion here :P?
>
> Yes, we don't know how to fix it. So the user really has no clue what to do. So
> moving the problem to him won't solve a thing.

I'm not sure I understand. I get this message when going to SourceForge:

You have requested an encrypted page that contains some unencrypted information.
 Information that you see or enter on this page could easily be read by a third
party.

That seems like *exactly* the same idea. Imagine a message like this:

The page you have requested is trying to set a cookie to for the website at
"co.uk". If this is not the website you expected, it may be an attempt to
compromise your security.

[X] Block suspicious cookies without asking me.

And, still, only people browsing short (..\...) domain names will ever see this
message. Yes, it exposes that the software is, after all, not omnipotent... but
so do other messages and questions it contains, at times.

In either case, I'd rather have the alert than no protection at all. A question
about the cookie might be bad form, but isn't it worse to do nothing? I can
just imagine if IE didn't even ask you for ActiveX installs, and did them all
silently.

*shudders.*

-[Unknown]