Forum Vulnerability?

[Paratima]

See Computerworld article.

Do we have a potential problem?

[Bok]

Potentially yes, most every site is vulnerable to it as it's a problem in flash. Though note that the vulnerability is not on the forum server, but on the user end when viewing a malicious flash attachment.

We watch for user content pretty well though, so we'll spot anything obvious uploaded as an avatar. Also note that new users cannot upload anything for a time and need a certain amount of posts before they can.

There is no fix..

Bok

[LAURENU2]

Bok you have to fix all your Sig's they are starting to take up so much room that I have to scroll to read the posts here

[Paratima]

Thanks, Bok. This is me, keeping up on my security patches!

[gopher_yarrowzoo]

Bok you have to fix all your Sig's they are starting to take up so much room that I have to scroll to read the posts here

LOL laurenu2 and your one doesn't :P mind you i am running it at above 1024x768

[LAURENU2]

I thought 1024x768 was a standard Was I wrong

[Bok]

I think it's the width causing a problem rather than height yes ? I'll see if I can alter that somewhat..

But as you say, these days 1024x768 is becoming less the standard. Personally I think you get a much better net experience a higher resolutions. I run 1680*1050 on each of my two monitors which is perfect..

Bok

[alpha]

1680x1050 here too, but was on 1280x1024 for a long time.

I can't say I've had problems with anything at either of those resolutions. I always have the browser maximized and usually no superfluous toolbars and the like.

[the-mk]

what is this? the "I have the biggest resolution"-thread? may I join?
1920x1200 here

[Shish]

One reason I don't like netbooks and mobiles is the tiny screens and definition of the displays available even nowadays and I have always (until recently) had the earliest of new technology access from radio telephones in a briefcase, thru' mobile Motorola brick phones and onwards. I recently tried an oled screen on an as yet unreleased mobile and despite the enormous (for a phone) increase in definition and superb DTV both local and via the internet, I had great difficulty even reading a lot of sites, even when I could get decent internet either mobile or via my home network. Most sites and major internet sites including BBC, which I use for news and other stuff, have mobile versions suited to only minimum definition technology as I recently found when trying this device on both mobile version and full size version and this incredibly expensive device had problems for me with both as tho' it was possible to display normal 1024 (and even higher) it needed a magnifying glass ( or the magnify tool which was included) to read them. Even piping it to a 50 inch tv (at 1920 p ) caused some problems though the device could easily handle the output.I have used very high definition HPs (scientific use) and use a 24in at home of this brand. My point however is that it would be nice to have auto resizing sites capable of interacting with the device being used instead of just a standard (of some sort) definiton for one class of device and a mobile, minimum or completely different in some cases, site for home users. My normal 24in HP is capable of more than it's native 1920x1200 resolution but quite happily adapts to most others from 640x480 up over to a high of 2340 where it is (just) usable but uncomfortable for some items and progs.
So Bok, unless I'm missing the point of this (quite possible), is auto resizing of the site possible?, practical? or are we to have 2 entirely separate outputs at a certain, fixed, minimum, resolution not just here but over the internet for any site. And having started to look at flash some time ago, I find I increasingly dislike both the loading times of low bandwidth, flash enabled sites and the increased risk of virus infection being transmitted inside them having had to deal with several recent laptops infected by a flash advert on some gaming sites which is both an infection and a scam. I know I hated Macromedia Flash teaching in college and considered it mostly wasted valuable bandwidth when people were designing sites and am not surprised at the vulnerabilities now being found by clever, sometimes nasty, people who have nothing better to do than finding and exploiting vulnerabilities to scam people out of money or just cause them even more difficulties than they already had and scare them off the internet which, otherwise, would be a valuable resource for them in solving their problems of daily life. Sorry about the rant bit but I provide my services free to a lot of people who would otherwise be cut off from family and facilities available on the internet by reason of age, disability or just lack of knowledge and a lot of my time has been wasted sorting out computers infected even with an expensive (no names, no packdrill) anti virus/ internet program installed. My time is no longer expensive in actual pounds or currency but valuable only in what I am able to do and when and for whom. Sometimes I just hate mankind but that is unfair really.
Again, please accept my appologies for any ranting, it is not directed at Free-DC in any way shape or form but I notice occasional new (first post) members posting questionable links which are a major and very easy vulnerabilty to exploit as temptation to exploit is no different now to when it was Eve and Adam with the Apple (Mac?)

[Bok]

So Bok, unless I'm missing the point of this (quite possible), is auto resizing of the site possible?, practical? or are we to have 2 entirely separate outputs at a certain, fixed, minimum, resolution not just here but over the internet for any site.

The stats themselves do auto-resize thanks to some nifty javascript that Gopher put in over a year ago... in the forum vBulletin also resizes just fine - I'm looking at it now fullscreen at 1680x1050 on one of my dual setup monitors and it's using the full width.

Does it work on mobile devices, the answer is no, there is a practical minimum width - it's something I've thought about but for the number of users (and I include myself in that category on the iPhone) it's not worth it..

Bok

[Shish]

Quote, "Does it work on mobile devices, the answer is no, there is a practical minimum width - it's something I've thought about but for the number of users (and I include myself in that category on the iPhone) it's not worth it..
Bok"

I agree completely as I have tried the site on a roughly 7in.WSOl and even with the definiton possible with oled it was awful.
So toss ur netbooks in the bin or give them to the kids for MSN chat (with suitable controls). Serious users only please... ( with non portable 17in LED High Def laptops running off 12v car batteries or preferably 18in AppleMac Super computers that tip off ur lap and smash on the foot of the guy sitting next to you on ur 300MPH Virgin train with hispeed mobile internet access.... and yes I am joking really
OK, have you tried finding an unbooked seat on a train recently? Or been able to afford the ticket price at the station cos ur netbook/phone couldn't handle the res on the internet or even get a connection for long enough to buy one online at less than half the price? (Non business users without PA's or secretaries as they used to be called, only of course).
Oh the joys of waiting for technology to evolve or companies to catch up with what their customers want. And that definitely doesn't include this site as I know Bok and others will continue to do their utmost to provide whatever is possible and that is much appreciated by countless members.
Actually, a lot of this post was generated because of some recent experience of trying to use mobile internet to get home from the "Big Smoke" and using it on a new device whilst on my way home via an incredibly expensive (to me, but glad I didn't have to pay for it) ticket in First/Business Extra class on a modern high speed train which didn't go very fast at all because of repair/modernisation whatever of the lines and also attempting to keep a connection to a supposedly high speed internet facility which still worked on mobile type data systems (i.e. download a page then disconnect....hit the next link/page and wait while it reconnects, renews it's data..whatever, or even finds the next cell signal... etc etc etc.
To then find the site I wanted to use didn't have either a mobile version or a viewable resolution on one of the newest, most expensive devices you can't even buy yet and to add insult to injury, kept disconnecting me every time I changed cell when we were actually moving at some speed because it needed a log in at all times and then verified you via an IP address or, if you were a mobile, you couldn't use standard Microsoft or industry standard verification because of the nature of most mobile services. I must admit, I wondered how the company whose site it was, had become a multi whatever currency, top International business if their executives couldn't even get access via mobile internet on their company provided, very expensive laptops and similar devices to the one I was using. Can't all be still conducting business on a landline surely? I know they have Cisco provided IP phone and cells along with top of the range laptops?
Sorry, wittering again I suppose...... uh oh!!! The damn thing actually rings like a phone as well? Now how do you get off spying on the Yanks via Google Earth? And how the hell do I save that Aussie beach view of the sun and surfer babes so the wife doesn't see it? Wonder if it does secret wallpaper saves? Don't want to speak to THAT guy anyway. UH OH, THAT's a SPECIAL ringtone. Wonder if they have access to the webcam in it.... Oh dear, it drops the internet when you actually use it as a phone and I hadn't had time (another poorly set up default) after the warning on screen to save what I was doing.......