These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Straight answer on (image tags)?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#81 - 2011-09-06 15:20:57 UTC
CCP Karuck wrote:
Riflin' Betty wrote:

I do believe I still have the right to disagree?


Of course you do, and we do value constructive feedback.
But apparently you haven't read our other reasons for doing this (or you are simply trolling). Even I myself have downplayed the remote chance of getting an injection attack via an img tag.

I'm sorry I'm not going to reply further on this, but will continue monitoring other feedback.


Do please let us know about the process of discussions/planning with the web team about the uploaded images solution okay? And just to remind, I think it would be a good idea for the forum producer to work on a devblog that has some solid milestones/timescales for further development.

Would much appreciate you passing this on to him/her?

All the best.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#82 - 2011-09-06 15:21:21 UTC
Riflin' Betty wrote:
CCP Karuck wrote:
Riflin' Betty wrote:

I do believe I still have the right to disagree?


Of course you do, and we do value constructive feedback.
But apparently you haven't read our other reasons for doing this (or you are simply trolling). Even I myself have downplayed the remote chance of getting an injection attack via an img tag.

I'm sorry I'm not going to reply further on this, but will continue monitoring other feedback.


Very well, I'll be constructive.

You can resolve this in a very clean (not to mention nove,l in gaming anyways) fashion by alotting a small amount of storage space on your web server for signature images for your users. That way you can both enforce size/weight for signature images and be sure that there is no off-site shenanigans going on.

If you were feeling particularly generous you could later expand this to include storage for screenshots and the like to be used on the (completely unused) EVE gate so we can share our experiences with other capsuleers as was the mission statement.

There, see? i can do it!


I think you have been reading the wrong thread, specially considering that your constructive criticism has been suggested in the second page of this thread and has been repeated ever since.
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2011-09-06 15:21:55 UTC
I'm not web guru by any means. But, wouldn't the concern of exploit be eliminated by CCP allowing images displayed/linked to from approved image hosting? It would keep CCP from having to host images which will never happen. And would provide the community with at least an option to have images in their posts which is a very popular feature. The forum could scrub any link not on the approved list just like it does for bad words. This could of course be temporary until CCP can fix the interwebz and make it safe for everyone. Otherwise, we'll never have images.

Don't ban me, bro!
Riflin' Betty
Perfunctory
#84 - 2011-09-06 15:22:54 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
the thing is, we now have to look at the forums in a different perspective, while before all the services were spread through different platforms/software (api, forums, account, etc) they're going to be inevitably under the same platform (and I do support that, from all perspectives


Actually that part is apparently not the case, as per Sreegs blog post during the botched forum launch prior to this one, though it seems like a likely future step, I agree.
Ajurna Jakar
Jian Products Engineering Group
#85 - 2011-09-06 15:23:35 UTC
Riflin' Betty wrote:
CCP Karuck wrote:
Riflin' Betty wrote:

I do believe I still have the right to disagree?


Of course you do, and we do value constructive feedback.
But apparently you haven't read our other reasons for doing this (or you are simply trolling). Even I myself have downplayed the remote chance of getting an injection attack via an img tag.

I'm sorry I'm not going to reply further on this, but will continue monitoring other feedback.


Very well, I'll be constructive.

You can resolve this in a very clean (not to mention nove,l in gaming anyways) fashion by alotting a small amount of storage space on your web server for signature images for your users. That way you can both enforce size/weight for signature images and be sure that there is no off-site shenanigans going on.

If you were feeling particularly generous you could later expand this to include storage for screenshots and the like to be used on the (completely unused) EVE gate so we can share our experiences with other capsuleers as was the mission statement.

There, see? i can do it!


\signed

http://eve-corp-management.org/ 
CCP Rhayger
C C P
C C P Alliance
#86 - 2011-09-06 15:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Rhayger
Riflin' Betty wrote:


You can resolve this in a very clean (not to mention nove,l in gaming anyways) fashion by alotting a small amount of storage space on your web server for signature images for your users. That way you can both enforce size/weight for signature images and be sure that there is no off-site shenanigans going on.

If you were feeling particularly generous you could later expand this to include storage for screenshots and the like to be used on the (completely unused) EVE gate so we can share our experiences with other capsuleers as was the mission statement.

There, see? i can do it!


And that is one of a number of options being considered, not being evasive we just haven't finished going over options and planning out workloads. The important thing is

1. we do want to provide an ability for embedded signature images
2. we want to make sure it's done securely and doesn't impact performance
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#87 - 2011-09-06 15:24:37 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
I never said none of the complaints were justified
…you only implied it.
Quote:
You are one of those people BTW.
Maybe you should read what I write every now and then. I'm pretty consistent in my complaints: do something stupid, and I complain about it because it was a stupid thing to do.

That is, of course, unless you think that “no matter what they do”, it always is, and always will be, stupid, in which case yes, I will always complain for that very reason. I'm not that pessimistic, though — I think they can actually do things right, and when they do, I don't complain about it.

This consistency confuses a lot of people — I can't even begin to count how often I have been accused of being a CCP apologist, and how (equally) often (and even in the same thread) I've been called a CCP hater. Lol
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#88 - 2011-09-06 15:25:29 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
I'm not web guru by any means. But, wouldn't the concern of exploit be eliminated by CCP allowing images displayed/linked to from approved image hosting? It would keep CCP from having to host images which will never happen. And would provide the community with at least an option to have images in their posts which is a very popular feature. The forum could scrub any link not on the approved list just like it does for bad words. This could of course be temporary until CCP can fix the interwebz and make it safe for everyone. Otherwise, we'll never have images.


Tbh, implementing that feature, and implementing the inside the forum image upload feature there isn't much difference, and I would (if I would be a decision maker at CCP) rather more implement it myself that being dependent on a third party site.
Riflin' Betty
Perfunctory
#89 - 2011-09-06 15:26:29 UTC
CCP Rhayger wrote:
Riflin' Betty wrote:


You can resolve this in a very clean (not to mention nove,l in gaming anyways) fashion by alotting a small amount of storage space on your web server for signature images for your users. That way you can both enforce size/weight for signature images and be sure that there is no off-site shenanigans going on.

If you were feeling particularly generous you could later expand this to include storage for screenshots and the like to be used on the (completely unused) EVE gate so we can share our experiences with other capsuleers as was the mission statement.

There, see? i can do it!


And that is one of a number of options being considered, not being evasive we just haven't finished going over options and planning out workloads. The important thing is

1. we do want to provide an ability for embedded signature images
2. we want to make sure it's done securely and doesn't impact performance


Great! I'll give you a week, that should be more than sufficient time for a team that large! ;D

Yes, tis a cruel barb, but I just want to put some pepper in your bottoms so we can put all the debacles behind us pronto.
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2011-09-06 15:27:45 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Mr Kidd wrote:
I'm not web guru by any means. But, wouldn't the concern of exploit be eliminated by CCP allowing images displayed/linked to from approved image hosting? It would keep CCP from having to host images which will never happen. And would provide the community with at least an option to have images in their posts which is a very popular feature. The forum could scrub any link not on the approved list just like it does for bad words. This could of course be temporary until CCP can fix the interwebz and make it safe for everyone. Otherwise, we'll never have images.


Tbh, implementing that feature, and implementing the inside the forum image upload feature there isn't much difference, and I would (if I would be a decision maker at CCP) rather more implement it myself that being dependent on a third party site.


No 'a' third party site. There are plenty of legit image hosting sites out there. It's not a perfect solution. It's a bandaid to at least give the players the ability while CCP corrects the fundamental issues with the interwebz.

Don't ban me, bro!
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#91 - 2011-09-06 15:33:12 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Mr Kidd wrote:
I'm not web guru by any means. But, wouldn't the concern of exploit be eliminated by CCP allowing images displayed/linked to from approved image hosting? It would keep CCP from having to host images which will never happen. And would provide the community with at least an option to have images in their posts which is a very popular feature. The forum could scrub any link not on the approved list just like it does for bad words. This could of course be temporary until CCP can fix the interwebz and make it safe for everyone. Otherwise, we'll never have images.


Tbh, implementing that feature, and implementing the inside the forum image upload feature there isn't much difference, and I would (if I would be a decision maker at CCP) rather more implement it myself that being dependent on a third party site.


No 'a' third party site. There are plenty of legit image hosting sites out there. It's not a perfect solution. It's a bandaid to at least give the players the ability while CCP corrects the fundamental issues with the interwebz.


What part of that 'bandaid' gives about the same work as implementing the in the forum upload space you haven't understood ?

As CCP Rhayger said right now the issue is about planning work hours for tasks, and those things take time, your 'bandaid' would take the same time being approved (working at a company like CCP is not the same as you making bandaids in some personal forums where ppl fool around) and the implementation is about the same as the first idea.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#92 - 2011-09-06 15:40:57 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:

See I don't find images in signatures to be superfluous at all. Eve players like signatures, they personalize and express creativity, they foster corporate and alliance tribalism and they have enabled the emergent gameplay of design service for in-game isk for space artists. This issue is about functionality and feature set that we already had that was removed by an "expansion" in the software.

You could see some parallels with "incarna losing us the hanger environment" if you were being cruel.

But I think it is a mistake to start de-prioritizing the restoration of forum signatures at the cost of the players who like these things and might well get paid ISK for producing them on the grounds its not core FIS (I HATE THAT TERM) development.

Lets face it - a lot of eve spaceship balancing is ridiculously trivial number juggling too but that still doesn't get done.

New eve forums and web team and here now to talk to us - lets encourage them to complete the project properly and maybe that instinct might spread a bit wider round the canteen if the players are happy with them doing it.

*shrugs*

Crazily optimistic but sue me!


Well, there we go, our posts are reflections of our opinion, obviously what I wrote is my opinion, and as I respect yours I do expect the same, for me they are superfluous, you make several good points that support your opinion, and I do respect that, the thing is, we now have to look at the forums in a different perspective, while before all the services were spread through different platforms/software (api, forums, account, etc) they're going to be inevitably under the same platform (and I do support that, from all perspectives, as a developer and as a user) the security concerns are allot greater, thus all this issue regarding images (or better yet, the inclusion of external resources), to add more to it, in an ssl enable session, which complicates things more due to how easily one can hijack ssl session with man in the middle attacks though it.

Now priorities wise, please do think in a team manager perspective where you have X amount of man hours available, Y amount of tasks to do and you need to manage this the best way possible, now depending on all tasks at hand, this 'feature' of allowing images in a signature, can be thought as superfluous, for me, regardless, would be superfluous, but then I don't work for CCP :)


Fair enough to be honest and fair play to you.

Of course, if I did believe the implementation of upload space for signatures/graphics was going to bite into the new cyno / engine trails / launcher graphics scrum budget or get in the way of providing more content for small unit pvp then I'd probably live without them too for a while ... but hey, hearing about how CCP have caste distinctions between Dress Designers and Nebula designers even, I kinda doubt much crossover between the web team and supercap balancing number tweaker.

Basically I think this web/forum/spacebook team are about that element of the game universe so lets get them working on the things that are wrong with it specifically.

So sure, we could debate about which of the many irritating flaws of the new forum should get fixed first :)

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Ajurna Jakar
Jian Products Engineering Group
#93 - 2011-09-06 15:49:43 UTC
while we're gettting dev responces. any chance of a reason we cant have coloured text? was that a security issue also?

http://eve-corp-management.org/ 
Razin
The Scope
#94 - 2011-09-06 15:51:14 UTC
Mashie Saldana wrote:
I guess it's just a matter of time before people get used to have no signature images here.

Actually, what's going to happen is that part of the users will continue to complain, and in return fanboys will argue that we are getting this forum upgrade for free and that this is a distributed release and that CCP will surely iterate very soon. Some of the more extreme shills will insist that they didn't want these usability and customizability features anyway and that those are unnatural for a forum environment anyway. And so it will continue, since there is never a shortage of idiots.
Eladaris
Indefinite.
#95 - 2011-09-06 15:59:10 UTC
Razin wrote:
Actually, what's going to happen is that part of the users will continue to complain, and in return fanboys will argue that we are getting this forum upgrade for free and that this is a distributed release and that CCP will surely iterate very soon.


Actually I think anyone who tries to argue that the forum upgrade was "FREE" needs to look at what 72,000 man hours can buy ya.
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#96 - 2011-09-06 16:07:39 UTC
Ajurna Jakar wrote:
while we're gettting dev responces. any chance of a reason we cant have coloured text? was that a security issue also?


That is quite a valid question!!!
Razin
The Scope
#97 - 2011-09-06 16:15:15 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
AnzacPaul wrote:

I confess to know nothing about the subject, but this is interesting point to me. What makes these forums so vulnerable compared to any other?


Heh, really ? is that hard to understand ?

For starters, forums are linked to your EveGate account, therefore everything else, hijacking of your account, your details, eventually in the future when everything is consolidated in the same platform (evegate) your API data, etc, etc.

On other forums what have u got to loose ? possibly a password, and the revealing of your email, hence those forums rarely bother about any kind of security related to session hijacking and or other vulnerabilities.

So the logical conclusion is to separate the forums from the account management. No?

I know, makes too much sense for CCP.
Joe Skellington
Sarz'na Khumatari
#98 - 2011-09-06 16:16:24 UTC
I support this thread.

Please note that ASCII art is not permitted in the forum signatures. Spitfire
Razin
The Scope
#99 - 2011-09-06 16:17:02 UTC
Eladaris wrote:
Razin wrote:
Actually, what's going to happen is that part of the users will continue to complain, and in return fanboys will argue that we are getting this forum upgrade for free and that this is a distributed release and that CCP will surely iterate very soon.


Actually I think anyone who tries to argue that the forum upgrade was "FREE" needs to look at what 72,000 man hours can buy ya.

Well, EVE expansions certainly required man hours, however that never stopped those kind of arguments.
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#100 - 2011-09-06 16:30:30 UTC
Razin wrote:

So the logical conclusion is to separate the forums from the account management. No?

I know, makes too much sense for CCP.


No, quite wrong, the logical conclusion would be the ability to upload images into the forum and use them from inside, there are a truck load of advantages to have all unified in one platform development wise which in turn provides better and more features for us.