Hi Gang, Hey I upgraded my linux based syncronet to 3.17c yesterday.Upgrade
from CVS all seems to have gone great except now I am unable to access any of the flie library from the standard web interface. Has anyone else seen this behavior? Even when logged in to the web interface as me, (geo) if I look at the logs I see it try to access the ftp as user #2 Guest.
It may be a change in the way the web browsers all work.
I know Coz mentioned it has been broken for him for a while now on irc.
Anyone else seen this behavior?
Re: ftp via web interface broken?Upgrade from CVS all seems
By: Geo to All on Wed Apr 08 2020 10:35 am
Hi Gang, Hey I upgraded my linux based syncronet to 3.17c yesterday.
library from the standard webto have gone great except now I am unable to access any of the flie
the web interface as me,interface. Has anyone else seen this behavior? Even when logged in to
Guest.(geo) if I look at the logs I see it try to access the ftp as user #2
It may be a change in the way the web browsers all work.
I know Coz mentioned it has been broken for him for a while now on irc.
Anyone else seen this behavior?
Yes, due to browser changes, nothing in Synchronet.
digital man
DM, Do you think it is something that can be fixed?
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Digital Man to Geo on Tue Apr 07 2020 19:57:30
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Geo to All on Wed Apr 08 2020 10:35 am
Hi Gang, Hey I upgraded my linux based syncronet to 3.17c yesterday. Upgrade from CVS all seems
to have gone great except now I am unable to access any of the flie library from the standard web
interface. Has anyone else seen this behavior? Even when logged in to the web interface as me,
(geo) if I look at the logs I see it try to access the ftp as user #2 Guest.
It may be a change in the way the web browsers all work.
I know Coz mentioned it has been broken for him for a while now on irc.
Anyone else seen this behavior?
Yes, due to browser changes, nothing in Synchronet.
DM, Do you think it is something that can be fixed?
Just wondering. 8-)
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Geo to Digital Man on Wed Apr 08 2020 18:22:57
droppingDM, Do you think it is something that can be fixed?
the only real fix is to use http or https instead of ftp because most all browsers are dropping rendering of ftp retrieved pages and some are
ftp completely... this because standard ftp is as insecure as telnet... i don't know if they are supporting ftps or similar, though...
The "fix" is likely going to be a http/web base file library/transferinterface and just abandon and
possibly remove the HTML-over-FTP idea.underlying infrastructure
echicken has web-based file library thing for ecWebv4, I think, but the
(the Synchronet JavaScript Object Model) is insufficient to really do itright (not ec's fault, my
fault). We'll get there some day.
Re: ftp via web interface broken?the
By: Digital Man to Geo on Wed Apr 08 2020 11:44:59
The "fix" is likely going to be a http/web base file library/transfer interface and just abandon and possibly remove the HTML-over-FTP idea.
echicken has web-based file library thing for ecWebv4, I think, but
underlying infrastructure (the Synchronet JavaScript Object Model) is insufficient to really do it right (not ec's fault, my fault). We'll get there some day.
I think uploads are the main/only file-library-related thing that's missing from my web UI at this point. Other related features may be missing but could be added easily.
One problem might be the actual uploading. I think Deuce committedsomething
the other day re: large POSTs to the webserver, so that would need to be investigated, or some other mechanism used.
I'm using (I think) filebase.js to pull records out of the filedatabase(s),
but IIRC it's read-only. The ability to add records would be required. This is probably not worth the effort if you plan on overhauling the filelibrary
system in general in the nearish future.
credit adjustments (deductionsfrom my web UI at this point. Other related features may be missing but
could be added easily.
I'm just guessing that there are gaps even on the download side: like
from downloaders and additions to the uploader, at the configured rates),user notifications. Does
that stuff work?
I think it'll have to be HTTP-POST (no other solution comes to mind), butmight need a better scheme
Re: ftp via web interface broken?credit
By: echicken to Digital Man on Wed Apr 08 2020 03:30 pm
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Digital Man to Geo on Wed Apr 08 2020 11:44:59
The "fix" is likely going to be a http/web base file library/transfer interface and just abandon and possibly remove the HTML-over-FTP idea.
echicken has web-based file library thing for ecWebv4, I think, but the underlying infrastructure (the Synchronet JavaScript Object Model) is insufficient to really do it right (not ec's fault, my fault). We'll get there some day.
I think uploads are the main/only file-library-related thing that's missing from my web UI at this point. Other related features may be missing but could be added easily.
I'm just guessing that there are gaps even on the download side: like
adjustments (deductions from downloaders and additions to the uploader, at the configured rates), user notifications. Does that stuff work?
Oh, and if your filebase library is read-only, then you wouldn't beupdating
the file's statistics (times downloaded, last downloaded).ctrl/dsts.dab, a file that should be
And then there's the system-wide file transfer stats (stored in
deprecated in favor of a better file format), I'm guessing you'reprobably not updating those.
not implemented. A work-around would be to have the web server point toFTP-URLs for the actual file
transfer (which would require (re)authentication of the user) rather thanusing HTTP-GET, but that
seems like a hack.
I'm just guessing that there are gaps even on the download side:
like credit adjustments (deductions from downloaders and additions
to the uploader, at the configured rates), user notifications. Does
that stuff work?
None of the credit-related stuff is implemented, but I think it could be added without too much hassle.
There's probably an argument for keeping the credit system around (some torrent trackers have similar concepts still in use today), but it hasn't seemed worth the effort thus far. I can't remember anyone other than Phil wanting to use it recently.
Does Synchronet no longer update credits when files are downloaded viathe web interface? Sometimes
I've seen notices that someone downloaded some of my files via the weband it says I got credit for
the downloads.. I haven't seen much of that lately though, so I don'tknow if it's still working
properly for me or not.
It's still possible to run a dialup BBS, and if anyone happens to want todo that, the credit system
might be of use to such sysops.
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Digital Man to echicken on Wed Apr 08 2020 13:14:28
Oh, and if your filebase library is read-only, then you wouldn't be updating
the file's statistics (times downloaded, last downloaded).
And then there's the system-wide file transfer stats (stored in ctrl/dsts.dab, a file that should be deprecated in favor of a better file format), I'm guessing you're probably not updating those.
Definitely not updating any of those at the moment. I'm sure some sysops care about that, but it hasn't been a priority for me.
tonot implemented. A work-around would be to have the web server point
FTP-URLs for the actual file transfer (which would require (re)authentication of the user) rather than using HTTP-GET, but that seems like a hack.
Yeah, I didn't want to involve the FTP server if I didn't have to, party because of authentication, partly because of general hackiness.
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Geo to Digital Man on Wed Apr 08 2020 18:22:57
browsers are dropping renderingDM, Do you think it is something that can be fixed?
the only real fix is to use http or https instead of ftp because most all
of ftp retrieved pages and some are dropping ftp completely... this becausestandard ftp is as insecure as
telnet... i don't know if they are supporting ftps or similar, though...
)\/(ark
yesterday. Upgrade from CVS all seemsHi Gang, Hey I upgraded my linux based syncronet to 3.17c
flie library from the standard webto have gone great except now I am unable to access any of the
to the web interface as me,interface. Has anyone else seen this behavior? Even when logged in
#2 Guest.(geo) if I look at the logs I see it try to access the ftp as user
irc.It may be a change in the way the web browsers all work.
I know Coz mentioned it has been broken for him for a while now on
interface and just abandon andAnyone else seen this behavior?
Yes, due to browser changes, nothing in Synchronet.
DM, Do you think it is something that can be fixed?
Just wondering. 8-)
The "fix" is likely going to be a http/web base file library/transfer
possibly remove the HTML-over-FTP idea.underlying infrastructure (the
echicken has web-based file library thing for ecWebv4, I think, but the
Synchronet JavaScript Object Model) is insufficient to really do it right(not ec's fault, my fault). We'll
get there some day.
digital man
Re: ftp via web interface broken?haven't
By: echicken to Digital Man on Wed Apr 08 2020 04:01 pm
I'm just guessing that there are gaps even on the download side:
like credit adjustments (deductions from downloaders and additions
to the uploader, at the configured rates), user notifications. Does
that stuff work?
None of the credit-related stuff is implemented, but I think it could be added without too much hassle.
Does Synchronet no longer update credits when files are downloaded via the web interface? Sometimes I've seen notices that someone downloaded some of my files via the web and it says I got credit for the downloads.. I
seen much of that lately though, so I don't know if it's still working properly for me or not.
(someThere's probably an argument for keeping the credit system around
dotorrent trackers have similar concepts still in use today), but it hasn't seemed worth the effort thus far. I can't remember anyone other than Phil wanting to use it recently.
It's still possible to run a dialup BBS, and if anyone happens to want to
that, the credit system might be of use to such sysops.
Cool, maybe I'll look into setting up ecWebv4 now that I'm stuck at home8-)
In theory. Most dialup systems are purely for novelty's sake and I think the credit system would be as well. I get that you don't want one person tying up the line all day, but it's not like anybody's got a queue of modem-only users with their terminal on auto-redial all day, dying tohear
a carrier instead of a busy signal.
It's still possible to run a dialup BBS, and if anyone happens to want
to do that, the credit system might be of use to such sysops.
Even over TCP/IP, credits could be useful. Statistics certainly are. <shrugs>
I'm working on creating a JS method you can call to "do the things" aftersomebody downloads a file.
I've seen some people running plain FTP servers implement a ratio system.If someone is running a
BBS that they plan to use mainly to host files, with potentially manyfile transfers, I suppose a
I've seen some people running plain FTP servers implement a ratio
system. If someone is running a BBS that they plan to use mainly to
host files, with potentially many file transfers, I suppose a
Yeah, that's what I was imagining when I made the comparison to private torrent trackers in an earlier message.
Someone *might* use Synchronet in
a scenario that involves a lot of file xfer traffic, so it *could* be a useful feature. For someone, but not most of us.
In theory. Most dialup systems are purely for novelty's sake and I think the credit system would be as well. I get that you don't want one person tying up the line all day, but it's not like anybody's got a queue of modem-only users with their terminal on auto-redial all day, dying tohear
a carrier instead of a busy signal.
Geo wrote to Rampage <=-
the only real fix is to use http or https instead of ftp because most
all browsers are dropping rendering of ftp retrieved pages and some are dropping ftp completely...
Oh wow, I had no idea they were doing this. Seems sad. That will
be the end of anon ftp sites then 8-(
itIn theory. Most dialup systems are purely for novelty's sake and I
think the credit system would be as well. I get that you don't want
one person tying up the line all day, but it's not like anybody's
got a queue of modem-only users with their terminal on auto-redial
all day, dying to hear a carrier instead of a busy signal.
I've seen some people running plain FTP servers implement a ratio system. If someone is running a BBS that they plan to use mainly to host files, with potentially many file transfers, I suppose a sysop might want a credit system. But generally I'd agree, credit systems are a novelty thing. I haven't configured any credit system on my BBS since I started
again in 2007.
On 04-09-20 07:31, Gamgee wrote to Geo <=-
Well, no..... as long as you access them with an FTP client,
instead of a browser, they work just fine.
Nightfox wrote to Digital Man <=-
Even over TCP/IP, credits could be useful. Statistics certainly are. <shrugs>
Yeah, I could see situations where credits could be useful over TCP/IP.
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
On 04-09-20 07:31, Gamgee wrote to Geo <=-
Well, no..... as long as you access them with an FTP client,
instead of a browser, they work just fine.
I'm sure wget will keep working with FTP. :)
On 04-09-20 21:06, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'm sure wget will keep working with FTP. :)
Yep, it sure will! ;)
Well, no..... as long as you access them with an FTP client,
instead of a browser, they work just fine.
I'm sure wget will keep working with FTP. :)
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
I'm sure wget will keep working with FTP. :)
Yep, it sure will! ;)
wget is probably what I access FTP sites with most often
nowadays, because I'm automatically grabbing a known file, or
have copied and pasted a ftp:// URL to a headless machine. :)
On 04-10-20 10:09, Rampage wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
the key aspect of this, with regard to browsers, is the rendering of
html pages pulled via ftp... that's the initial thing that is being dropped... html pages retrieved via ftp are now downloaded and saved to disk rather than being rendered and displayed as if they were served
via the http(s) protocol(s)...
aside from that, ftp is being dropped for security reasons, too... some bright spark figured out how to set up an iframe off screen or too
small to be seen and this iframe would make a ftp connection to a site using the configured credentials... a lot of people actually ocnfigured their email address in their browser instead of leaving the default "something@" in place... this gave the nefarious ones the person's
email address...
there was other stuff also being done that could retrieve the passwords configured in the browser and send them to the site, as well... then
all the nefarious had to do was put them together and see if they could get into the accounts... if nothing else, they at least gathered more valid email addresses to sell on their spam lists...
yeah, sneaky bastards, they are...
On 04-10-20 19:29, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
I'm sure wget will keep working with FTP. :)
Yep, it sure will! ;)
wget is probably what I access FTP sites with most often
nowadays, because I'm automatically grabbing a known file, or
have copied and pasted a ftp:// URL to a headless machine. :)
Yes, I use it a lot that way, too.
Also in many of my scripts that auto-grab updates and such.
the key aspect of this, with regard to browsers, is the rendering of
html pages pulled via ftp... that's the initial thing that is being
dropped... html pages retrieved via ftp are now downloaded and saved
to disk rather than being rendered and displayed as if they were
served via the http(s) protocol(s)...
Which actually makes more sense, when you think about it. FTP is for transferring files, not rendering web pages.
On 04-11-20 08:38, Rampage wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
well, that's the thing... transferring the file is exactly what it was doing... they were just then handing the downloaded file to the browser section for rendering once it arrived... once the browser got it, it rendered it just like it had been pulled via http... technically, both protocols are for transferring files... it is what is done after
getting the file that makes the difference ;)
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Rampage to Geo on Wed Apr 08 2020 01:16 pm
It's not just insecure, it was a badly designed protocol. I'm guessing it'll go the way of UUCP and Gopher eventually, relegated to the dustbins of history, put out to pasture, given a nice a grave stone that nobody will visit. :-(
digital man
Re: ftp via web interface broken?
By: Rampage to Geo on Wed Apr 08 2020 01:16 pm
It's not just insecure, it was a badly designed protocol. I'm guessing it'll go the way of UUCP and Gopher eventually, relegated to the dustbins of history, put out to pasture, given a nice a grave stone that nobody will visit. :-(
Sadly, I agree, after many years (decades?) I abandoned rumemaster (thank you runemaster )... and all of my self-hacks to it ... it was awesome ... switched to webv4 ...
I believe it is time to include webv4 back into cvs
switched to webv4 ... I believe it is time to include webv4 back into cvs:-p
Sadly, I agree, after many years (decades?) I abandoned rumemaster (thank you runemaster )... and all of my self-hacks to it ... it was awesome ... I switched to webv4 ... I believe it is time to include webv4 back into cvs :-p
switched to webv4 ... I believe it is time to include webv4 back
into cvs :-p
I don't mind using CVS, but webv4 was never in there. I had two main reasons for putting it on GitHub instead (biggest one being that I can track issues there), and it's worked out fairly well so far.
Maybe it can migrate over one day, but there are some things I'll want to sort out before then.
I remember ecwebv3 being in CVS. I seem to remember reading that it wasthe
plan to eventually make ecweb the default Synchronet web interface, and I thought it may make it easier if ecweb was in CVS. Though, I remember the Synchronet 3.17 installer having an option for whether you want the older Runemaster interface or ecwebv4 installed with Synchronet.
it may make it easier if ecweb was in CVS.
currentit may make it easier if ecweb was in CVS.
I've heard this a few times lately, and I don't really get it. The
update process is to run a script via jsexec. (Or just install and update using git.) Seems like roughly the same amount of work as doing a CVS update.
Maybe people don't want to have to remember some other non-CVS update step, which I guess is fair.
Nightfox> One of my mods with the Runemaster interface was a sidebar with Nightfox> links to various pages, though I was using frames (which Ithink
Nightfox> might be generally discouraged, as I never see web sites using Nightfox> frames anymore).
right... most switched to using CSS to fake frames but there are also a lot of iframes being used... some of them are being used without the user's being aware as they are pixel sized or out of the viewing area... those are the sneaky ones generally doing nefarious things...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 368 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 86:35:07 |
| Calls: | 7,895 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,968 |
| Messages: | 5,792,010 |