[freenet-support] From FMS: insertion error

2009-01-24 Thread Dennis Nezic
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:10:57 +0100, 3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i wrote: > herb at 5FeJUDg2ZdEqo-u4yoYWc1zF4tgPwOWlqcAJVGCoRv8 wrote: > > I have a big problem with recent releases (after 1194). > Uploads crash. See this screenshot: > CHK at >

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
can do it with iptables rules. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20090124/cffdd3f1/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
that, fproxy can still be probed for, just not individual sites... We should also warn about it in the README... -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20090124/9390cdd5/attachment.pgp>

[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,

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1203

2009-01-24 Thread Matthew Toseland
n any case. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20090124/f5d926d9/attachment.pgp>

[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.

[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 [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

[freenet-support] From FMS: insertion error

2009-01-24 Thread 3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i
h...@5fejudg2zdeqo-u4yoywc1zf4tgpwowlqcajvgcorv8 wrote: I have a big problem with recent releases (after 1194). Uploads crash. See this screenshot: c...@c8~jdmdn0iz7tbkjmvmamcuqimfzkgqqjgpiofsabny,9GXBGEXt5v3UzVMEufgQTvvYtUBPwWWh Vr5tOjYG9V8,AAIC--8/.jpg Uploads stop before 100% and the