Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread [Anon] Anon User
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext In Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org wrote: The real solution to browser history stealing is simply to use a separate browser for Freenet than the one you use for the wider web. We now warn users about

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Friday 23 January 2009 01:53, [Anon] Anon User wrote: -BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext In Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org wrote: The real solution to browser history stealing is simply to use a separate browser for Freenet than the

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Dennis Nezic
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:05:41 +, Matthew Toseland wrote: There have been some question marks over whether it is possible to load an image from an external domain and get a callback when it is loaded - if so, it may be possible to time fetches of specific sites from javascript on an

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Dennis Nezic
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:05:41 +, Matthew Toseland wrote: Meaning running a web browser on a system with access to fproxy is dangerous. I haven't tested this, maybe you'd like to? I would imagine that the same problem exists on a system with access to fcp? or telnet if it's enabled? Ie.

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Saturday 24 January 2009 17:41, Dennis Nezic wrote: On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:05:41 +, Matthew Toseland wrote: There have been some question marks over whether it is possible to load an image from an external domain and get a callback when it is loaded - if so, it may be possible to

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Dennis Nezic
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 18:07:24 +, Matthew Toseland wrote: fproxy can still be probed for, just not individual sites... We should also warn about it in the README... You mean the executable/jar can still be probed for on the filesystem? Maybe. But it can't be done via the network interface, if

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Saturday 24 January 2009 18:18, Dennis Nezic wrote: On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 18:07:24 +, Matthew Toseland wrote: fproxy can still be probed for, just not individual sites... We should also warn about it in the README... You mean the executable/jar can still be probed for on the

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-23 Thread Ancoron Luciferis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: On Thursday 22 January 2009 22:30, Ancoron Luciferis wrote: Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1203 is now available. Please upgrade. The main change in 1203 is that history cloaking is removed. It is very messy

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-22 Thread Ancoron Luciferis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1203 is now available. Please upgrade. The main change in 1203 is that history cloaking is removed. It is very messy code-wise and does not really solve the problem - for example, if a user posted the

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-22 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Thursday 22 January 2009 22:30, Ancoron Luciferis wrote: Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1203 is now available. Please upgrade. The main change in 1203 is that history cloaking is removed. It is very messy code-wise and does not really solve the problem - for example, if a