RationalWiki:Technical support

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>

Shortcuts:

Autogenerated list of users with Tech rights: Special:ListUsers/tech.


Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it!

The people with root on the servers are Tmtoulouse and David Gerard.

If your IP is blocked from editing as an open proxy: you need to go to your provider about it. The lists we use are xbl.spamhaus.org, dnsbl.tornevall.org, all.s5h.net - if your IP is on one of these lists, then your provider has a serious problem they need to resolve. We cannot get your ISP out of the blacklist.

Contents

[edit] Herein goeth anything regarding the technicalities of the wiki

FAQs & Problems:

  • Problems with accessing the wiki
  • Queries about extensions
  • Javascript Help
  • CSS Help
  • Wikitalk Help

If you've written, or are using, some extension or script that either might give others problems or is giving you a problem, then either describe it or link to it on this page.

If you've written some piece of code that you want help with, ask here with linkage.

If your browser acts up with some code,ask here.

In short, anything techy, ask, tell or link on this page.

If you think it is a server-type issue, feel free to email the goat at dgerard@gmail.com and David might see it soonish.

[edit] Loss of session data

I just got this error message, without realizing it ever happens (thus no copy to back up). Very frustrating given the volume of text and references that were lost (thereby ensuring the epigenetics article remains a citation-deficient stub); trying to go back to the edit page didn't work. I don't know if this is due to high text volume--if so, this error would be happening every time someone tries to write a new article (e.g., on Whitehead's pray-the-gay-away text My Genes Made Me Do It!). (OverpoweredHellriegel1915) 14:03, 12 November 2016

[edit] Your proxy protection sucks

I am literally writing this while logged in via a proxy because my regular, non-proxy IP is blocked for supposedly being a proxy. Your bot says something something DNBSL. Seriously, for a supposedly technology-savvy project, RW has a lot of software fuck-ups...

But what do I care, I am
"literally Hitler" —Weaseloid about Avenger
, apparently for my stance defending Israel. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:11, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
"If your IP is blocked from editing as an open proxy: you need to go to your provider about it. The lists we use are xbl.spamhaus.org, dnsbl.tornevall.org, all.s5h.net - if your IP is on one of these lists, then your provider has a serious problem they need to resolve. We cannot get your ISP out of the blacklist." Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:36, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Security tip, it's never a good idea to go online with your real IP address. Because a) situations like this and b) once an attacker gets your real IP, it gives easier access to your machine. There's not really a good reason to have your real IP address out there. As for the block, do you have any clue why your ISP might think your IP was malicious and put it into a blacklist. I can only guess your real IP address was found along with proxy IPs deemed malicious, and your real IP was found guilty by association.—127.0.0.1 (talk) 19:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I clicked two of the three links the reverend provided, one of them did not work, the other two said my IP was "not on the list" (i.e. not deemed a proxy) - I am not quite sure what list your blocking is based upon. I think an update is in order. And I would actually prefer to only edit via a proxy server here, but there seems to be some irrational aversion against them and sometimes the captcha borks if I use a proxy. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I will be putting zero effort into doing anything about this whatsoever - David Gerard (talk) 00:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Well to be frank, I did not expect you to put any effort into this, Gerard, as you have made your hatred for me and everything I stand for amply clear. But let's just say that my ISP is not Telstra (which is well known for spam and vandalism problems) and I have never had any problem on any page of the internet (including several different wikis) with my IP. Just extrapolate from my problem how many well-meaning potential contributors you are potentially excluding by something that is potentially easily fixable. Just do the same thing Wikipedia does - there I cannot edit through proxy servers like the one I am using to write this, but my natural IP without a proxy works just fine to fix a typo or the likes. Best regards to the Reverend. And to Gerard: May your wishes for me come true for you. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:53, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Sadly we haven't had anyone foolish enough to step up to be RW admin yet. I quit months ago ... - David Gerard (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Avenger, I'm going to point out that, if your home IP address (not wi-fi, work, the library, your school's computer, etc) is in the CBL (cbl.abuseat.org) you've probably got a serious problem you should address. Specifically, you probably have a virus infection spewing out spam, and that is not cool. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

How, Avenger, do you write a query about blocklists in such confrontational terms? 94.1.138.216 (talk) 22:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

  • They're so full of it. I've triggered that more than once on wi-fi or highly dynamic cellular IPs, and EVERY time the IP was listed in the Composite Blacklist (cbl.abuseat.org). It's clear they are using the CBL, and the CBL specifically says NOT to use their service for anything but mailserver blacklists. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 03:14, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Your captcha does not display anything

I had to make use of the audio captcha (which sucks balls) because your visual captcha does not work. Techies - fix this. SOLVE MEDIA is the only thing it says.— Unsigned, by: 77.22.253.32 / talk / contribs

It's worse than that. If scripts are disabled, captcha works for me, but with scripts on I have to make two attempts because the first attempt will go as follows:
The captcha image will be the phrase "irresistibly modern" and, with or without any action from the user, the browser will be redirected to a bullshit "you've won a prize" page. 94.1.138.216 (talk) 21:48, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Update: It didn't do it this time. Maybe it's fixed. 94.1.138.216 (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
It's hit or miss. Sometimes Solve Media will give me a real captcha, whereas sometimes it redirects to some prize or scareware nonsense. I hope they don't fix it, the broken captcha runs a bunch of would be editors away, and I hope someone with a really expensive Samsung Galaxy device complete destroys their phone with that scareware, figures out it is RationalWiki's fault, and sues RationalMedia into bankruptcy. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 13:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Better yet, I hope an employee of some Fortune 100 company tries to edit from their company-issued device, somehow gets an Android virus from the captcha, and opens the company up to a massive data breach (think Target's data breach), and the corporate IT department figures out this site was to blame and David Gerard knew about it. Then I hope some snooty corporate lawyer serves Trent's foundation with a multi-million dollar lawsuit. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Firefox now warns that the LogIn page is not secure.

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Firefox_now_warns_that_the_LogIn_page_is_not_secure..

Just a note to let people know that the new Firefox (51) is now showing a warning on all non-secure web pages which contain password fields. This includes RationalWiki's login page. For this release it's just a grey lock icon with a red strike-through in the address bar, but future releases are planing to get worse.

Here's Mozilla's blog post on the subject:

https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2017/01/20/communicating-the-dangers-of-non-secure-http/

I don't know what other browsers do, but my guess is that they will soon start doing something similar if they are not doing it already.

87.192.220.205 (talk) 16:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

You'll be glad to hear that our next big milestone is upgrading our entire MediaWiki platform, which will get us SSL. ETA: TBD. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
No, SSL is separate. It requires access to the load balancer, which I don't have. Trent is AWOL again and apparently uncontactable - David Gerard (talk) 19:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
How do you know? Were you there? Jokes aside, if access was granted, could something like this be relevant? I noticed it's marked as "stable", but that's about where my MediaWiki powers end. They are very weak indeed. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
No, that's a completely different thing. Basically we need to terminate SSL at the load balancer (which is the IP that the name rationalwiki.org points at) and that can then talk to the squids by plain HTTP - David Gerard (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Gotcha — thanks, old timer. Which reminds me; where is Trent? Not vanished to the Caymans, right? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:54, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit] For frick's sake, quit misusing the CBL

From cbl.abuseat.org:
What affect is this listing having on you?
The CBL is intended to be used only on inbound email from the Internet.
If you are being blocked from IRC, Chat, web sites, web email interfaces (eg: you're using Internet Explorer or Firefox to send email) or anything other than basic email with a mail reader like Exchange, Thunderbird etc, the provider of this service is using the CBL against our recommendations. Contact the provider and refer them to http://www.abuseat.org/tandc.html and refer them to item 2 and 7.
Twice now I've tried to edit from a very large hospital, and it's blacklisted for a spam infection on the wi-fi network. The IT people won't do anything about it because it's on the wi-fi network and they claim they have no way of stopping the abuse. Really though, that's irrelevant, what is relevant is that this site is misusing the Composite Blacklist. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 03:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

This needs more attention. My suggestion is to signup.—127.0.0.1 (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Captcha glitch

Something else to point out: sometimes when I use an Android device to edit a page, I get redirected to a scareware site claiming my phone is infected with a virus. Don't know if there's anything you can do about it. It does NOT happen on PCs 184.5.12.196 (talk) 03:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

At what point does it sink in that you're on a network made of toxic waste - David Gerard (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Seriously. Let that sink in. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
You're right, I'm on the internet and that is a network filled with toxic waste. That's why so-called fundie schools use net-nanny filters to keep their impressionable students safe from nonsense. Seriously though, if you read what the CBL (which you are obviously using) says about using its service for what you are using it for, it basically says that you are a dumbass. It's designed for mail servers to filter out email spam, not wikis. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 21:02, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
You're using a network you know is full of toxic waste and you're OUTRAGED that the networks-full-of-toxic-waste blockers block it - David Gerard (talk) 23:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
If you want to use the CBL to block protocols other than SMTP on port 25 (ie: IRC), realize this is officially UNSUPPORTED by the CBL team... It should be absolutely clear that there will be a potentially large number of affected users who, through no fault of their own, will NOT be able to delist due to NAT, dynamic IPs, or other similar issues. Anyone using the CBL for blocking IRC, blog comments or whatever needs to know that they will get collateral damage and they will either have to manage that themselves with whitelisting or live with it. Idiot. IPs listed in this should fix their problems, but that doesn't make you less of an idiot. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 13:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
By the way, the scareware crap that comes from this site's captchas has nothing to do with toxic waste on the editor's side. It is toxic waste on YOUR site. Now you know about it, and when someone else who is stupid as you are actually falls for that scareware, I hope RationalMedia has insurance. 184.5.12.196 (talk) 13:23, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Re scareware: According to Microsoft:
[W]e have came across situations in which the used WiFi router was exposed to malicious code and interacting this way with the Windows Phone devices.
If this is the situation, the attack can be performed through sites that do not perform end-to-end authentication for their packets. In other words, sites that do not use SSLWikipedia's W.svg or an onion domain are vulnerable to a Man-in-the-middle attackWikipedia's W.svg. The site does not use SSL now but plans on switching in the future. RationalWiki is not legally accountable for this attack and is not legally accountable for user security because it is not dealing with confidential information.
If you are infected: If you have been infected by malware please follow these steps and stop once you no longer have malware:
  1. Backup your data
  2. Factory reset your phone
  3. Reinstall your phone's OS
  4. Root your phone and reflash the firmware and bootloader. Then reinstall the OS.
  5. Buy a new phone.
Unfortunately, most mobile phones make it difficult to do 3 and 4.
Prevent this attack in the future:
  1. Use the NoScript plugin for Firefox to prevent injected malicious scripts from executing in your browser.
  2. Use secure Wi-Fi networks that are password protected and have a firewall.
  3. Be alert when using sites that don't use SSL
Re CBL: I have yet to hear anyone with admin authority to confirm that the site uses CBL. Could you state why you are assuming this?—127.0.0.1 (talk) 17:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
We don't, we use the list at the top of this page - David Gerard (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Making a page considered "harmful"??

Like, I found out about a gamergate guy just recently and tried to make a page for him because we had none (created an account to shield my IP so a gamergater doesn't dox me for my edits, you know how they are) But it keeps sayin it's harmful for me to make a page for him. Something about "spam" and "abuse" rules, and I'm not entirely sure how I am breaking these rules? Can an administrator please help me with this. I really love the work on this site so its so weird seeing my attempt at writing an article blocked like this. — Unsigned, by: Akaede / talk / contribs

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:19, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Capcha glitch, unauthenticated edits being rejected

It appears that unauthenticated IP edits are being rejected as "probably spam, harassment or dox." Looks like the capcha filter is broke. I was encountered with a stupid Progressive Insurance ad, twice, and both edits failed despite entering the right response to the stupid ad capcha. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 05:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I think I fixed it (it seems that the filter had an extra "pipe" in it that made it reject non-autoconfirmed edits containing literally anything). Note to self: last blocked edit was today at 08:02. Let's see what happens next.--JorisEnter (talk) 10:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

[edit] IP edits not welcome?

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki:Saloon bar#IP edits not welcome?.

The edit filter calls constructive IP edits "spam, harassment, or dox." Mods/techs pls fix. SmartFeller (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I verified this bad behavior here too. Reported to the slobs in charge. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 05:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
The filter actually appeared to be blocking ALL non-autoconfirmed edits.
On 11:16, 16 February 2017, Reverend Black Percy edited the filter. From 11:28, 16 February 2017 to 08:02, 19 February 2017, the filter has "caught" 248 edits. I think I've found the source of the problems, folks. Reverted back to version as of 08 December.
Please IP-edit to confirm. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 15:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Just going to point out here that I already fixed the issue.--JorisEnter (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
We can't get vandalized if nobody can edit. Jokes aside, though — I broke the edit filter? Sounds about right... Facepalm.png Sorry, everybody! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
support
Community
Tools