On Monday 19 January 2009 22:42, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > All browsers suck for our purposes: there are just too many ways to break > > security, and too many performance caveats. IMHO we have moved on from that > > debate. > > > > The main problem with a firefox plugin/extension is that websites may be able > > to probe specific Freenet URLs, e.g. via the img src/onLoad trick, or using > > CSS link:visited, or some variation on the various port scanning exploits. > > Hence my suspicion that we may be better off with an XULRunner-based app? > > Have a look at mozswing, it wraps xulrunner as a Swing component. > LimeWire 5 uses it as an embedded browser. Eclipse also wraps xulrunner > in Java for its help browser, though I don't know how.
Yeah, Ian likes mozswing. It wraps the firefox APIs in java afaics, which explains why there is no documentation. For now, we're not going to implement anything with project resources for 0.8, although I will review saces' work on wxFCP. > > Cheers, > Michael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090120/81df8c0a/attachment.pgp>
