World: r3wp
[Plugin-2] Browser Plugins
older newer | first last |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [253x2] | there is another issue which is to the advantage of the applet: if it was not known as trustworthy, no one would use it. |
peter, there is in fact one bank which issues color coded papercards instead of codes. it's also the only bank which is almost completely cross platform, since they don't use java. | |
PeterWood 4-May-2006 [255] | That's true. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [256x2] | if there is a breach in bank security it's all over the news immediately |
but.. we're not all banks | |
PeterWood 4-May-2006 [258] | Personally, I'd be very cautious to allow any third-party to have "trusted access" to my machine. I'm the sort of person who turns off any type of automated updating. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [259x2] | the problem is that turning such things off, automatically makes educating users on how to use a specific service, much more expensive |
a paradox is also that many of these services only work in IE, a notoriously insecure browser :-) | |
Allen 4-May-2006 [261] | I put a few of the usual suspects up.. http://www.rebolforces.com/plugin/rotate.htm http://www.rebolforces.com/plugin/reblox.htm http://www.rebolforces.com/plugin/psquares.htm |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [262] | Java applets and JavaScript scripts are usually only allowed to access their own server over the network. I think you can make that same restriction to REBOL using the secure native. |
Allen 4-May-2006 [263] | I note that if I browse from one page to the next (using links at bottom of each page) , the subsequent pages won't load .. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [264x2] | allen, yeah, it's a known bug :-) |
brian, the only method to access something locally would be through cookies? | |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [266x3] | Without prompting the user, cookies and JavaScript. Perhaps REBOL could prompt for any additional files it needed to access using a standard file open dialog (by standard I mean native). |
Anything more would require a cryptographically signed script, traceable to your SDK license key, and thus to you. | |
I think that anonymous scripts shouldn't even get a sandbox directory. | |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [269] | and so, what about attempts to run it outside the browser? I'm thinking licensed scripts that someone figured out to download separately and tries to run it directly in REBOL/View. I'm not sure how much of an issue this is, but it's a first step towards reverse engineering. |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [270] | Anonymous script source should be just as visible as JavaScript source. SDK scripts can be encrypted, but traceable. Safety. |
Allen 4-May-2006 [271x2] | why not a sandbox for anonymous, Brian? as long as its is the only place, lock down no read or write outside it. Widgets, flash, google earth etc all allow state & cache in sandbox |
apple and konfabulator widgets would not be as numerous if signing was required for scripts | |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [273] | Henrik, if someone wants to run an anonymous browser script in /View they are welcome to try, but the browser integration won't be there so the script may not work. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [274x2] | something else entirely: should there be a more REBOLish way to access the browser DOM tree? |
(I think it would be very cool to have a DOM tree browser written in REBOL) | |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [276x3] | Anonymous scripts should be able to read through the browser cache, at least for files from their own site, but should assume that those files won't necessarily persist beyond the browsing session. You don't want to give them a sandbox that doesn't have its space limited by the browser's existing facilities, for security and privacy reasons. You definitely don't want anonymous scripts to store more than cookies on your systems. The guideline you should set for default behavior of anonymous scripts is to limit it to the activities that would be OK for deliberately malicious code to do. Assume that all anonymous code is out to get you until proven otherwise. This is a browser plugin you know - it will be used in banner ads. |
Konfabulator widgets are more comparable to regular reblets running in View. Just because they are implemented in XML/CSS, doesn't mean they are held to the same behavioral standards as web pages. | |
Yes, a DOM tree browser would be very cool. | |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [279] | and "sell" it to the AJAX developer community :-) |
BrianH 4-May-2006 [280x3] | I'm OK with a virtual sandbox that gets deleted on browser shutdown. We don't want REBOL to be used as a vehicle for persistent, hidden tracking data to be put on users' computers. I want a browser plugin, but I want one that even the paranoid would be OK with installing. |
As long as the virtual sandbox can't be used to generate data files that can fill the hard drive (or even be written to it), it should be fine. | |
BTW, someone needs to consider the new plugin activation that Microsoft added to get around that BS patent, and what effect it will have on the IE browser plugin. | |
Cyphre 4-May-2006 [283] | Hello Josh! I have one request. Try to run this: under IE: http://www.rebol.cz/~cyphre/plugin-ie.html under Mozilla/FF etc.: http://www.rebol.cz/~cyphre/plugin-moz.html Drag the green box using mouse and try to move it quickly over the screen. You can see the time lag when the green box is updating the position. Now try this from normal Rebol/View console: do http://www.rebol.cz/~cyphre/plugin-moz-test.r You can see there is no lag and the green box is updated very quickly. Do yo have any idea what could cause this difference? my specualtions: 1. Are you always blitting the whole screen in the plugin versions? This could cause the slowdown as there should be updated only the part with green box on the screen. 2. Could be the slowdown cause by different(higher) amount of mouse events which are pumped from browser to the plugin? |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [284x2] | cyphre, try resizing the browser window to fit the plugin. it doesn't speed up, so it might be something with mouse events |
even making the window very small doesn't help | |
Cyphre 4-May-2006 [286] | yes, it looks more like event overflow. |
Chris 4-May-2006 [287x3] | I have two wishes re. Rebol and the browser -- 1) to use Rebol as a language replacement for JS, and 2) to be able to launch Rebol scripts intelligently. The importance of running Rebol as a Flash replacement is a distant third. |
2) I have brought up before -- a plugin could intercept and interpret a Rebol script, using the header metadata to create a launch 'page'. | |
1) is likely a pipe dream without ubiquity. As messy as JS/DOM is, it is a standardised language that most if not all modern browsers adhere to. That it is standardised allows Ajax developers to depend on it (which was not the case when pre-standardised implementations ruled). | |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [290] | well, you can minimize the use of JS, but not entirely get rid of it. I'd imagine that someone could conjure up a library that translates common DOM access through JS to rebol code |
Chris 4-May-2006 [291x2] | 2) really should be the focus. |
For as long as I've been creating Reblets, the pain is in exposure -- explaining to people (inc. parents) how to actually launch them. An intelligent browser launch mechanism would minimise that. | |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [293] | if this is done right, the plugin should be just as easy to install as flash |
Chris 4-May-2006 [294x3] | 2) Past disussion mid-November in 'Advocacy' group. Mockup here: http://www.ross-gill.com/arran.html |
Henrik: is Flash even installed any more? Seems it's distributed with the OS nowadays. | |
That should read: does Flash even need to be installed any more? | |
JoshM 4-May-2006 [297] | hi all, thanks for your feedback. good ideas. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [298] | there are issues with it under linux at least. Macs ship with it as standard. I think you still need to install it under windows, but it's fairly easy under IE |
JoshM 4-May-2006 [299] | I've made a couple of checklists: Plugin 1.3.2 Mozilla bugs -- bugs you see in the pre-alpha of Mozilla plugin. Plugin 1.3.3 feature reqs -- feature requests for the next version of the plugin. |
Henrik 4-May-2006 [300] | also the empty boiler plate should be more refined to display that this is a rebol plugin area, rather than just display the version number |
JoshM 4-May-2006 [301x2] | Please post your bugs and feature reqs there....one bug/feature request per item. Repro steps and target platform (for bugs) and clear descriptions with examples (for feature requests) help :) |
Here's my thinking on priority on the plugin project: 1. IE plugin for 1.3.2 -- we'll have this online within a couple of days. 2. Mozilla plugin for 1.3.2 -- features equivalent to the IE plugin, although we may need to chop a few things out (do-browser for instance). 3. IE plugin for 1.3.3 -- the most important new features we can include in a relatively short time-frame release. 4. Mozilla plugin for 1.3.3 -- again, features equivalent to the IE plugin, but this is equal priority with the next item. 4. IE plugin for REBOL 3.0 -- new features that will ship with REBOL 3.0 (multithreading/multiple instances per browser, etc.) 5. Mozilla plugin for REBOL 3.0 -- features equivalent to IE | |
older newer | first last |