IRC Log Viewer » #firebreath » 2013-01-03

IRC Nick Time (GMT-7) Message
Hibernatus34 17:01 hello
In IE protected mode, some devices are unavailable (for example : WIA scanner trough the TWAIN-WIA bridge). I have tested a commercial plugin that is signed by a trusted CA and it has the same problem. So how come signed Java applets don't seem to have this problem ? How could the Java plugin run in unprotected mode ?
taxilian 18:01 I don't think Java runs as a plugin
I think it's direct integration with the browser
and it has its own security settings that the browser more or less trusts
there are a few options for getting around that
the easiest (for a single computer) is to just add your domain to trusted sites
and then you won't be in protected mode
fi that doesn't work, you'll probably have to launch a broker process to talk to the scanner
Hibernatus34 18:01 I thought java became a plugin like any other one. I'd find it a little too easy if i can launch another process to do the job. I could dump the exe myself, so it would be a big security hole. I'll try that anyway, and i'll try using WIA directly too.
taxilian 18:01 Hibernatus34: you can launch another process, but you have to register that process as being allowed to be started that way when you install
Hibernatus34 18:01 Thanks
taxilian 18:01 info on how to register the broker:
Hibernatus34 18:01 Hey this is great information. Many thanks !
taxilian 18:01 easy to find… but only if you know what your'e looking for
Hibernatus34 18:01 i'm a little ashamed to say it, but i know that page, just stopped reading it too early (too much work + not a fast reader in english)
taxilian 18:01 I know how it goes when your'e reading another language
Hibernatus34 19:01 How would you pass an image to the html ? Is it possible to create an Image object in FireBreath ? Using a local file doesn't work in recent browsers, and base64 doesn't work in older browser (or it is limited in size).
vshih 22:01 I developed a Google Chrome plugin, DropboxDiff, using firebreath quite simply, just to trigger a user-configured executable.
I built binaries for Windows, mac, and linux (ubuntu), and they all seemed to work on those environments, for me. However, a mac user has mentioned that it doesn't work for her, and another fedora user also ran into issues. I ran fedora in a VM and confirmed the problem; a fedora-specific build ended up working.
My question is, does anyone have any insight into how many different binaries are necessary to be able to cover all types of Chrome users?
Do I need to build for all permutations of OS, architecture (32-/64-bit, etc.), OS version even?
vshih 23:01 And, if multiple binaries are indeed necessary, are there any resources for cross-compiling that anyone could recommend.