Giskart | 1 Apr 01:27 2003
Picon
Picon

search function on the English wikipedia

http://www.search.com/search?channel=19&cat=63

On this page you can send a search query to several encyclopedia but 
Wikipedia does  not work anymore.

There must be more websites who send direct query's to wikipedia and now do 
not work anymore.

Is there anything that can be done? 

--

-- 
Contact: giskart AT wikipedia.be
Ook een artikeltje schrijven? WikipediaNL, de vrije GNU/FDL encyclopedie
http://www.wikipedia.be
Jason Richey | 1 Apr 01:39 2003

Re: Re: Matthew Barney

The redirect for wikitech-l@... is gone now(as is the wikinl-l
redirect).  I thought I had already done this, but apparently not...

Jason

Giskart wrote:

> Performing Art <unsub@...> wrote in
> news:200303311425.h2VEP9q6018317@...: 
> 
> > <html><head>
> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
> > charset=iso-8859-1"> <TITLE>ARTPRICE SEARCHBAR TM - Matthew
> [cut spam]
> 
> 
> I still recieve lots of spam on the wikitech-l@... posting adress.
> Can somebody delete the wikitech-l@... adress please?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Contact: giskart AT wikipedia.be
> Ook een artikeltje schrijven? WikipediaNL, de vrije GNU/FDL encyclopedie
> http://www.wikipedia.be
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@...
> http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

(Continue reading)

Tim Starling | 1 Apr 02:24 2003
Picon

Re: What, no salt?

Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:

> > (Tim Starling <ts4294967296@...>):
> >
> > If we really want to be serious about security we'll have to use
> > ssl for login, but I don't know how to do that.
>
>That's entirely too paranoid. Frankly, I don't see much need
>for high security of Wikipedia logins.  It's not like we're
>storing medical records. (Oh my God! My neighbor might find
>out that I like the "Nostalgia" skin!)  The only real risk is
>that someone might log in as me and make edits in my name, but
>then I'd just disavow them and change my password.

There are two reasons to have good security:

1) To prevent hijacking of an administrator/developer account.
2) To prevent password theft. Many users use the same password for a number 
of sites.

Of course, users who know anything about Internet security should expect 
websites to handle their passwords insecurely -- everyone does it. Wikipedia 
is certainly not alone.

>The present saltless-md5 was an improvement over the original
>code which had passwords in plain text in the database where
>any sysop could see them all with a select; /that/ was probably
>a bit too loose :-), so I md5'd them.  If making a slightly
>better encrypted version improves things with no hassle, that's
>fine too.  But let's not get worked up over nothing.
(Continue reading)

Brion Vibber | 1 Apr 03:21 2003
Picon

Re: search function on the English wikipedia

On Mon, 2003-03-31 at 15:27, Giskart wrote:
> http://www.search.com/search?channel=19&cat=63
> 
> On this page you can send a search query to several encyclopedia but 
> Wikipedia does  not work anymore.

That hasn't worked since at least January 2002. Some months ago I
discovered it and hacked up our URL-rewrite rules a bit to allow the old
UseMod search syntax, but their end still failed to parse our results
page and returned nothing. Presumably no one is interested enough in
this to have ever written them to fix it.

> There must be more websites who send direct query's to wikipedia and now do 
> not work anymore.
> 
> Is there anything that can be done? 

We ought to have an RSS wrapper for the search engine which would be
friendlier to meta-searching than parsing a perhaps ever-changing web
layout.

Volunteers?

-- brion vibber (brion  <at>  pobox.com)
The Cunctator | 1 Apr 08:29 2003

Re: What, no salt?

On Mon, 2003-03-31 at 16:40, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> > Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> > 
> >>Frankly, I don't see much need
> >>for high security of Wikipedia logins. 
> > 
> > 
> > Agreed.  Remember that in the old wikipedia software, anyone could log
> > in as anyone else, password or no password.
> 
> Yes, but
> * wikipedia was small (=little known) at that time

And now it's big, with a lot more people watching over it and protecting
it. It takes a lot more to kill a colony of ants than a few ants.

> * with all the new enhanced functions, sysops can do much more damage 
> today ;-)

Not really. In fact, with the enhanced user-blocking of today, there's
just about nothing a rogue sysop could do that couldn't be easily
reversed.

> * if someone hacks an administrator password (e.g., mine), a "DELETE 
> FROM cur" would have us looking for backups pretty fast...
> 
That's the only problem, and we have tons of backups.

In other words, all this paranoia is tedious and unhealthy.
(Continue reading)

Jimmy Wales | 1 Apr 15:04 2003

Re: What, no salt?

Jason Richey wrote:
> So, if the masses finally decide that we "need" SSL, who's paying for
> the security certificate?  Or would we have to plan to run without a
> properly signed cert?

I would pay for this if we needed it, but we don't, so it's a moot
point.  :-)
tarquin | 1 Apr 18:21 2003

Re: Minimal skin (comments desired)


tarquin wrote:

>
> Let's have a fixed topbar then :-)
> can we fool IE into displaying *something* reasonable for that too?
> it would be great if this works on all browsers -- we can have this as 
> the new default skin. :-D
>
what's happening with the new skin?

New design at http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/

I've been inspired by this recent discussion.  (which is the artistic 
way to I've copied some of Nick's ideas ;-)
Nick Reinking | 1 Apr 18:36 2003

Re: Minimal skin (comments desired)

On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:21:53PM +0100, tarquin wrote:
> 
> 
> tarquin wrote:
> 
> >
> >Let's have a fixed topbar then :-)
> >can we fool IE into displaying *something* reasonable for that too?
> >it would be great if this works on all browsers -- we can have this as 
> >the new default skin. :-D
> >
> what's happening with the new skin?
> 
> 
> New design at http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/
> 
> I've been inspired by this recent discussion.  (which is the artistic 
> way to I've copied some of Nick's ideas ;-)

Sorry, I've been busy with school lately.  I should have an updated look
at http://www.twoevils.org/files/wiki/Rabbit-minimal.html in a couple
days.

--

-- 
Nick Reinking -- eschewing obfuscation since 1981 -- Minneapolis, MN
Nick Reinking | 1 Apr 19:45 2003

Re: Minimal skin (comments desired)

On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 10:36:02AM -0600, Nick Reinking wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 05:21:53PM +0100, tarquin wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > tarquin wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > >Let's have a fixed topbar then :-)
> > >can we fool IE into displaying *something* reasonable for that too?
> > >it would be great if this works on all browsers -- we can have this as 
> > >the new default skin. :-D

Okay, it is updated, with a working topbar and quickbar in everything.
I couldn't turn off Mozilla quirks mode without breaking IE 6 Win.
(http://www.twoevils.org/files/wiki/Rabbit-minimal.html)

Fixed positioning working in:
Camino (Mozilla 1.0.1 based) (MacOS X)
Mozilla 1.3 (Windows XP)
IE 5.2.2 (MacOS X)
Safari 1.0 Beta v60 (KHTML based)

Absolute positioning working in:
IE 6.0.2800.1106.xpsp1.020828-1920 (Windows XP)
Links 0.96 (CYGWIN_NT-5.1, cygcurses++5, Windows XP)
Links 0.98 (Linux 2.4, ncurses5)
Lynx 2.8.4rel.1 (CYGWIN_NT-5.1, cygcurses++5, Windows XP)
Netscape 4.8en (Windows XP) (with quirks, but perfectly usable)

Whew!  Other testing would be cool.
(Continue reading)

Brion Vibber | 1 Apr 21:33 2003
Picon

YASU (Yet Another Sendmail Upgrade)

I've installed the latest security fix packages for sendmail, yet again.
Any thoughts on switching to postfix or such?

-- brion vibber (brion  <at>  pobox.com)


Gmane