TheRailwire
Admin => Administrative => Topic started by: wcfn100 on October 19, 2020, 09:19:39 PM
-
If your using Chrome and can't see the picture, you probably need to go into the Site Settings and click 'Allow' for Insecure Content.
You can get to site settings by clicking the 'Not Secure' at the top of the page, go to Site Settings and scroll down to Insecure Content.
Jason
-
I can't either.
-
Don't use Chrome...
-
I can't either.
It's just a silly title. Maybe I should change it. :P
I just put this here because it seems like it's happening a lot.
Jason
-
I'm on my phone right now, but if Chrome is blocking the unsecured content it will not say "not secure". It will only say that after you allow it.
-
If your using Chrome and can't see the picture, you probably need to go into the Site Settings and click 'Allow' for Insecure Content.
You can get to site settings by clicking the 'Not Secure' at the top of the page, go to Site Settings and scroll down to Insecure Content.
Jason
It looks like Chrome recently removed that option, at least on Android
-
I am not able to find such a place in settings.
I agree, I think it has been removed by Chrome. And, I am on a laptop.
???
THX
Gary
.
-
It looks like Chrome recently removed that option, at least on Android
It may only be Chrome on Windows.
Jason
-
Click on the part of the address that says "https" a box will pop up. Go to site settings. Scroll down to block uncesure content and allow it.
-
Mobile internet sucks because there are no extensions, plug ins or settings to fix all your problems.
-
I'm on my phone right now, but if Chrome is blocking the unsecured content it will not say "not secure". It will only say that after you allow it.
My Chrome on Windows still says not secure even after allowing it.
Jason
-
Chris, that worked! THX! :D
did not know one could access settings there where you said
Jason, thanks to you also for making this adjustment known. :)
before i was going to see source, then hunt down the URL in the script, copying and pasting into google.
it work. but, wow...that was a lot of work!
thanks again both of you
Gary
-
My Chrome on Windows still says not secure even after allowing it.
Jason
Yes if you allow it. The page your on is no longer secure and will say "not secure". But if it automatically blocks the uncesure content it will NOT say "not secure".
-
If your using Chrome and can't see the picture, you probably need to go into the Site Settings and click 'Allow' for Insecure Content.
You can get to site settings by clicking the 'Not Secure' at the top of the page, go to Site Settings and scroll down to Insecure Content.
Jason
Worked for Chrome on Mac. Thanks!
-
Yes if you allow it. The page your on is no longer secure and will say "not secure". But if it automatically blocks the uncesure content it will NOT say "not secure".
Ahh, I get it now.
Jason
-
So here's the rollout for this 'feature'.
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0b-bgmQbOaDXLjeru-aSHMgu5CI=/0x0:1530x512/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:1530x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19710747/chart.png)
Taken from here:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/10/21132099/google-chrome-users-block-insecure-downloads-https-android-ios (https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/10/21132099/google-chrome-users-block-insecure-downloads-https-android-ios)
Also says -
These warnings are also coming to the Android and iOS versions of Chrome, but the above schedule will be delayed by a release for the mobile platforms.
Jason
-
Because if you post a train photo uncesurely Russia can hack it and turn it into an ad for who to vote for :trollface:
-
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0b-bgmQbOaDXLjeru-aSHMgu5CI=/0x0:1530x512/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:1530x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19710747/chart.png)
Interesting. So, basically, with v86 they're saying that unless a site operator pays somebody to maintain a certificate and reprogram their site for https:, content will not be viewable. Simple read-only content is thereby forced into "secure" world. So, others using Chrome essentially create a ransomware situation for me, where I have to pony up to play. Google can kiss my @$$.
-
Interesting. So, basically, with v86 they're saying that unless a site operator pays somebody to maintain a certificate and reprogram their site for https:, content will not be viewable. Simple read-only content is thereby forced into "secure" world. So, others using Chrome essentially create a ransomware situation for me, where I have to pony up to play. Google can kiss my @$$.
I think only secure sites trying to pull down non secure content are affected. If your site is not secure, I think it's just a warning. My own site in not secured and I get a warning in the address bar but I see the photos fine.
Jason
-
Uh... like TRW? That's the problem. TRW is secure, and linking from here to the non-secure content on my image archive server means Chrome users are or will be locked out from seeing my pix. Already had that problem last week, where a number of Chrome users didn't know about the (soon to vanish) workaround.
-
Uh... like TRW? That's the problem. TRW is secure, and linking from here to the non-secure content on my image archive server means Chrome users are or will be locked out from seeing my pix. Already had that problem last week, where a number of Chrome users didn't know about the (soon to vanish) workaround.
Yeah, that's where this seamed to start for several people. I first noticed it when DKS started his animation threads. I wasn't getting the images.
Jason
-
Interesting. So, basically, with v86 they're saying that unless a site operator pays somebody to maintain a certificate and reprogram their site for https:, content will not be viewable. Simple read-only content is thereby forced into "secure" world. So, others using Chrome essentially create a ransomware situation for me, where I have to pony up to play. Google can kiss my @$$.
Yep. And an SSL cert ain't cheap. Even worse: my host offers a generic SSL for free. Turned it on. Google said, sorry, generics are no good. Thank you, Google. :RUEffinKiddingMe:
At least MS Edge still allows mixed content... so far. But since MS just apes everything Google does, there's no knowing how much longer Edge will still allow it.
-
At least MS Edge still allows mixed content... so far. But since MS just apes everything Google does, there's no knowing how much longer Edge will still allow it.
Hate to tell you, but Edge is built off Chromium. It looks like the setting to block insecure content just isn't activated yet because it's set to block, but obviously isn't doing that.
Jason
-
Supposedly I can buy a certificate for $20/yr. for the domain I keep the images on, and it's a primary SSL.
HOWEVER, that doesn't automatically fix everything: 1) based on prior experience maintaining a dual HTTP/HTTPS site, I would need duplicate repositories, one for each access method. Maybe the site wasn't setup properly? Then, 2) I would have to touch EVERY link I have on TRW to change the HTTP to HTTPS. I have 1000+ images in the archive, nearly all linked from TRW during the 11 years I've been here.
[...sigh...]
Hate to tell you, but Edge is built off Chromium. It looks like the setting to block insecure content just isn't activated yet because it's set to block, but obviously isn't doing that.
I just downloaded the current Chromium to see what was going on. It was set to block. Unblocking was a matter of clicking on the lock icon next to the URL (for TRW, not the image server domain) and change the Unsecure Content setting to 'Allow'. I guess that will be the workaround for the time being.
Not looking forward to bowing down before the HTTPS gods and screwing with my server. Last year's hardware crashes aside, it's not needed much maintenance or other sysadmin attention. I guess that was a luxury and it's time to pay the piper.
-
So when does the new extension for Chrome come to fix all this?
-
So now I'm at home on a real computer. :)
Right now this site is set to allow and on this page I see a little pad lock to the left of the address bar. That is what I'd click to get into site settings.
Or I could be a caution triangle with a ! saying "not secure" to click to get into site settings.
-
HOWEVER, that doesn't automatically fix everything: 1) based on prior experience maintaining a dual HTTP/HTTPS site, I would need duplicate repositories, one for each access method. Maybe the site wasn't setup properly? Then, 2) I would have to touch EVERY link I have on TRW to change the HTTP to HTTPS. I have 1000+ images in the archive, nearly all linked from TRW during the 11 years I've been here.
It becomes a nightmare. No easy fix. I just did a quick inventory. I've got ~3,738 pages, ~17,198 images , and a rough guess of close to 50,000 links. I literally won't live long enough to fix all of that.
All we can do is hope that the Chromium boys catch enough sh!t from the owners of the bazillions of sites they're breaking that they back off, at least for images. I know Google thinks they own the Internet, but guess what...
-
Hate to tell you, but Edge is built off Chromium...
Yeah, now that I think on it, I recall reading that. Forgot.
-
OK, it took some digging but I found that setting and got images to display again.
But it still doesn't make any sense why the only image block in on Railwire.
-
... it still doesn't make any sense why the only image block in on Railwire.
I suspect because user-linked content on most other forum sites is hosted on commercial servers (Google and Photobucket, et al), which provide SSL. @DKS and I, for example, have our own read-only servers with no need for HTTPS since we aren't taking user input. Lots of resentment here about this Chrome thing, frankly.
Putting on my tin-foil hat, I think this move forcing Chrome to embargo embedded simple HTTP content "in the name of internet security" is a backdoor to force everybody to pay for services, be it image hosting, certificates, or pro web development. Running your own web server (server farm in my case) used to be relatively easy and there were once many tools to facilitate this, but the Silicon Valley mafia is making sure that we independents have as difficult a time as possible. If you experience what Apple has done to their OSes over the past six or so years to hobble self-hosting, you would better understand what's going on.
And I'll bring up my bigger problem with Chrome - the mothership. Don't think for a nanosecond that Alphabet/Google isn't tracking and recording the finest details about your browsing activities through their browser. Why would they bother? Because they can. And do. The vast unwashed masses comprising the browsing public don't know, or care, which is why Google gets away with it.
Bottom line to both situations? Don't use Chrome. :x
-
...I think this move forcing Chrome to embargo embedded simple HTTP content "in the name of internet security" is a backdoor to force everybody to pay for services, be it image hosting, certificates, or pro web development....
Thank you. Took the words...
And I'll bring up my bigger problem with Chrome - the mothership.
And Chrome's old mantra, "Don't be evil"? Long, long since abandoned. They've surpassed MS by many a lightyear in this department.
-
Yes! Need a new browser. What's a good one to use? Also the DOJ is filling a huge anti trust lawsuit against Google today.
-
Yes! Need a new browser. What's a good one to use? ...
I use Mozilla Firefox almost exclusively across all three OS platforms in the house. Frankly it's a little clunky - I cannot fault Chrome and Chromium's speed - but the clunkiness comes with its oodles of built-in privacy and security protection. It performs poorly on a couple of maintenance sites I need to access every so often, and Safari seems to handle those fine.
In full disclosure, I use Chrome and Chromium... on my layout. It's a totally closed network with no connection to the public internet. It's the default browser on the Raspberry Pi 4 that runs the layout as well as the two dozen Android tablets (...obviously...) being used for local control panels. That said, I really do hate Android, as Google makes it damned difficult to wrench control away from the mothership and all the crap in the background intended to redirect everything you do to them. Android tablets are frequently super-cheap to buy, I just pay for them in my time to undo the snooping garbage and the processor time it consumes.
-
Yes! Need a new browser. What's a good one to use? Also the DOJ is filling a huge anti trust lawsuit against Google today.
Methinks Google has more far more lawyers than even the DOJ, so, good luck with that...
And even if Google is found guilty, the penalty would likely be petty cash for Google.
-
And I'll bring up my bigger problem with Chrome - the mothership. Don't think for a nanosecond that Alphabet/Google isn't tracking and recording the finest details about your browsing activities through their browser. Why would they bother? Because they can. And do. The vast unwashed masses comprising the browsing public don't know, or care, which is why Google gets away with it.
Bottom line to both situations? Don't use Chrome. :x
Exactly! That is why I have been for years using the Seamonkey browser.
-
I have yet to find any gateway or application anywhere else that is blocking those images except Railwire.
My site is hosted on a local ISP, which I like because I can literally walk down the street and yell at them.
But, checking every place that those images are posted - my own websites (which are not https), Nscale.net, trainboard, etc. Here's what I'm seeing.
My own websites - no problem with Chrome.
Nscale.net - no problem with Chrome, all good
Google searches - still show all my images, which is rather amazing.
Railwire - images completely dissapear with no tag or trace.
Trainboard - this is interesting - images disappear but [IMG] shows in the post so at least you are aware there's something there you can't see, so you're sort of prompted to check your security settings if you want to see it.
Trainorders - same thing, you have to unblock - but there's a tag there to show there at least was an image.
So check into that much? Why doesn't it at least show a tag there that there's an image its not displaying? Right now it's nothing.
-
I have yet to find any gateway or application anywhere else that is blocking those images except Railwire.
My site is hosted on a local ISP, which I like because I can literally walk down the street and yell at them.
But, checking every place that those images are posted - my own websites (which are not https), Nscale.net, trainboard, etc. Here's what I'm seeing.
My own websites - no problem with Chrome.
Nscale.net - no problem with Chrome, all good
Google searches - still show all my images, which is rather amazing.
Railwire - images completely dissapear with no tag or trace.
Trainboard - this is interesting - images disappear but [IMG] shows in the post so at least you are aware there's something there you can't see, so you're sort of prompted to check your security settings if you want to see it.
Trainorders - same thing, you have to unblock - but there's a tag there to show there at least was an image.
So check into that much? Why doesn't it at least show a tag there that there's an image its not displaying? Right now it's nothing.
That is most interesting. There certainly must be a technical issue at work here, one worth investigating (not that :tommann: needs more on his plate).
-
Trainboard - this is interesting - images disappear but [IMG] shows in the post so at least you are aware there's something there you can't see, so you're sort of prompted to check your security settings if you want to see it.
Does it make any difference whether or not you are logged into the TB forum when you are trying to view those images?