• GitHub
  • Documentation
  • Discord
  • Tip
search
  • chevron_right Threads
  • label Feedback

Unlimited paging (as NodeBB has)

heid
June 18, 2015
chat_bubble_outline 25
  • lock
chevron_right last_page
chevron_right last_page
  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    June 18, 2015, 10:05 p.m. June 18, 2015, 10:05 p.m.
    link

    Hi, I'm a new Python fan. As such, I recently found Misago and was wondering if its approach could be extended by optional NodeBB/Discourse features, like "pageless" threads when Javascript is enabled. (Of course, making Javascript mandatory would be a step into the wrong direction. I was just wondering.)

    Up to now, I like Misago. And it's shaping up to be much better than the other Python board system I saw. :)
    Thanks to the developer, I hope I'll find the time to contribute some code one day.

  • link
    rafalp
    Project Lead 2028 posts
    June 21, 2015, 4:46 p.m. June 21, 2015, 4:46 p.m.
    link

    Hello!

    Next Misago's release goes Discourse way with UI being powered by Ember.js application and Backend sticking to being API endpoints for that app to communicate with. I went this way as halfway trough work on new release I've realised I've de-facto started developing my on MVC js lib.

    As for infinite scrolling... well, I generally dyslike infinite scrolling on forums, so here's your answer. :] (but if pull-requests that gets this well and makes me happy shows up, I'll really consider merging it)

    heid likes this.

    favorite 1

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    June 21, 2015, 4:55 p.m. June 21, 2015, 4:55 p.m.
    link

    @rafalp

    Next Misago's release goes Discourse way with UI being powered by Ember.js application and Backend sticking to being API endpoints for that app to communicate with.

    Now this is something I'm not sure about. Does that mean Misago can't be used with Javascript disabled anymore? (Huge security risk.)

  • link
    rafalp
    Project Lead 2028 posts
    June 21, 2015, 5:08 p.m. June 21, 2015, 5:08 p.m.
    link

    Without JS Misago will provide you with simplified version of interface allowing you to browse pages that are available to un-registered, but forms will display "enable javascript to do XYZ" message instead.

    Also could you explain how that's huge security risk? Honestly, I've seen plenty of (valid) arguments against JS ui, but it being security risk is something I am hearing for first time. Thanks!

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    June 21, 2015, 5:11 p.m. June 21, 2015, 5:11 p.m.
    link

    Most computer malware today spreads through holes in browser JavaScript sandboxes. NoScript is one of the most widely used Firefox extensions, I don't allow websites to use JavaScript for no technical reason either.

    NoScript is the best anti-virus software in 2015.

    I urge you to allow sending the Post form without JS too. :-/

  • link
    rafalp
    Project Lead 2028 posts
    June 21, 2015, 5:39 p.m. June 21, 2015, 5:39 p.m.
    link

    Humm, are you sure you are not mistaking JavaScript for Java applets? I hear about attacks using JS, but they all fall into XSS territory where user first needs to be able to execute malicious JS on your site.

    You need JS interface to change app state, this means register, login, logout, change options, post, follow, subscribe and moderate.

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    June 21, 2015, 6:14 p.m. June 21, 2015, 6:14 p.m.
    link

    Yes, I am sure I don't mix them up. Most malware today - like drive-by downloads - spreads through JS holes in browsers. Java can be easily disabled, I don't use it either.

    You need JS interface to change app state, this means register, login, logout, change options, post, follow, subscribe and moderate.

    Server-side JS would be OK, but mandatory frontend JS would cause severe issues.

  • link
    USA
    Members 8 posts
    Aug. 28, 2015, 7:50 a.m. Aug. 28, 2015, 7:50 a.m.
    link
    @heid

    Yes, I am sure I don't mix them up. Most malware today - like drive-by downloads - spreads through JS holes in browsers. Java can be easily disabled, I don't use it either.

    You need JS interface to change app state, this means register, login, logout, change options, post, follow, subscribe and moderate.

    Server-side JS would be OK, but mandatory frontend JS would cause severe issues.

    I really do think you're mistaken there. NoScript is sort of just blocking the advancement of nice webpages, and really a pretty unnecessary "security" measure.

    Peterek likes this.

    favorite 1

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 8:41 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 8:41 p.m.
    link

    I think you're wrong.

  • link
    rafalp
    Project Lead 2028 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 8:54 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 8:54 p.m.
    link

    Could you elaborate your point further then? I would love to see reports showing JS as primary vector for malware propagation, for example.

    alff0x1f, heid and USA like this.

    favorite 3

  • link
    USA
    Members 8 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 9:17 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 9:17 p.m.
    link
    @rafalp

    Could you elaborate your point further then? I would love to see reports showing JS as primary vector for malware propagation, for example.

    I don't think they can, because such reports do not exist. <3

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 9:52 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 9:52 p.m.
    link

    Why do we have JavaScript fanboys here? - Well, technically JavaScript is (nearly) the only technique that actually allows XSS and Clickjacking exploits. Snowden approves that.

  • link
    rafalp
    Project Lead 2028 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:29 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:29 p.m.
    link

    Please do not mistake call for something to back your claim for fanboy attack. You've made some bold blanket statements, but you haven't backed those up with anything more than imho and, in last case, fud.

    USA likes this.

    favorite 1

  • link
    USA
    Members 8 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:37 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:37 p.m.
    link
    @heid

    Why do we have JavaScript fanboys here? - Well, technically JavaScript is (nearly) the only technique that actually allows XSS and Clickjacking exploits. Snowden approves that.

    Or you could just use software that doesn't have these exploits to begin with.

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:43 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:43 p.m.
    link

    IMNSHO people who clain I'm wrong without bringing their own evidences are not to be taken any more seriously than I am.

    In last case I actually made clear that avoiding JavaScripts also avoids common pitfalls in web development. But fine, here's some more evidence, all examples taken in 2015 (I might bring older evidence if required):

    1. JavaScript has built-in undeletable cookies.
    2. Rowhammer.js, a JavaScript-based DRAM attack.
    3. Enabling JavaScript made you attackable through the SoundCloud widgets found on some legit websites.
    4. Enabling JavaScript made you attackable if you were using eBay at the wrong time.

    Oh, and don't forget that there were, are and will be malicious ad banners which will most likely infect your system - unless you use NoScript which safely blocks them.

    TL;DR: Enabling JavaScript as a whitelist is a very, very bad idea. No one should do that.

    Tank likes this.

    favorite 1

  • link
    USA
    Members 8 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:44 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:44 p.m.
    link
    @heid

    IMNSHO people who clain I'm wrong without bringing their own evidences are not to be taken any more seriously than I am.

    In last case I actually made clear that avoiding JavaScripts also avoids common pitfalls in web development. But fine, here's some more evidence, all examples taken in 2015 (I might bring older evidence if required):

    1. JavaScript has built-in undeletable cookies.
    2. Rowhammer.js, a JavaScript-based DRAM attack.
    3. Enabling JavaScript made you attackable through the SoundCloud widgets found on some legit websites.
    4. Enabling JavaScript made you attackable if you were using eBay at the wrong time.

    Oh, and don't forget that there were, are and will be malicious ad banners which will most likely infect your system - unless you use NoScript which safely blocks them.

    TL;DR: Enabling JavaScript as a whitelist is a very, very bad idea. No one should do that.

    TL;DR: Every sensible browser has JavaScript on by default, which should be good enough.

  • link
    heid
    Members 26 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:45 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:45 p.m.
    link

    @USA

    Or you could just use software that doesn't have these exploits to begin with.

    Fun fact: XSS exploits are on websites, not in your software. Only a few months ago, WordPress got a security update which basically fixed an issue that enabled any visitor to embed malicious JavaScript code directly into the comments. Have fun avoiding all WordPress sites...

    TL;DR: Every sensible browser has JavaScript on by default

    ... which is why there are so many botnets. It should be off by default!

  • link
    USA
    Members 8 posts
    Aug. 31, 2015, 11:46 p.m. Aug. 31, 2015, 11:46 p.m.
    link
    @heid

    @USA

    Or you could just use software that doesn't have these exploits to begin with.

    Fun fact: XSS exploits are on websites, not in your software. Only a few months ago, WordPress got a security update which basically fixed an issue that enabled any visitor to embed malicious JavaScript code directly into the comments. Have fun avoiding all WordPress sites...

    Okay, I'll have a blast.

    ... which is why there are so many botnets. It should be off by default!

    You are kidding, yes?

chevron_right last_page
arrow_upward Go to top
  • This site uses cookies to gather statistical data for use in traffic analysis.
  • GitHub
  • Documentation
  • Discord
  • Tip
  • Terms of service
  • Privacy policy
powered by misago