|
|
|
Nothing to see here.
 
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:05 PM
Posts: 451,
Visits: 1,942
|
|
Binidj, if you re-read my posts here, I think you'll find I've explained exactly why this happens, and am not in the habit of repeating myself.
I'd like to clarify my testing, as you seem to imply that i've casually looked at this issue and merely dismissed it, what I said was that I've tested this, on several PC's at several locations, and found no problem, i've also checked the logfiles in depth, before and after we opened for general signups, and do realise what's happening. However its working as I currently intend it to work, all i've attempted is to explain why, at no point have i suggested i was going to offer a fix for this.
That said, we have a new release/update to the forum software coming in the next 14 days or so, when that goes live, this feature should improve or even fully fix this issue for certain users. I cannot ascertain or promise whether or not this will apply to individuals without scrutinising their configuration, which I have no intention of doing, so thats one pottential fix on the way.
I will however answer the new question you've posed "Why did Pagga do it, and Rule7 doesnt", Rule7 does, it just chooses to force you out in certain circumstances, at present this is quite verbose, in that i'd rather someone had to re-login, than run the risk of an intrusion. These reasons cover the security feature that logs you out in any case of a problem or discrepency.
The reasons:
1) Fundamentally Rule7 uses a different technology to Pagga, this allows us to offer some truly exceptional features in the future, some of these are close to launch, some have not even begun development yet, but the pottential is there to offer alot more than just a forum community, and we intend to make full use of that.
2) Rule7 is hosted on an enterprise server, which is shared with a few large corporate entities who very generously through their involvement CONSIDERABLY reduce the costs of maintaining our infrastructure, so that we can offer the features mentioned in point 1). These corporate entities have a security requirement for all systems they have data and core-business applications on, this means that we have to do our best to secure the server, the data, and all systems present on the system, this includes Rule7. This is in no way detrimental to the userbase, as the security of your private data and hence your privacy rights are better protected through this.
NB: Despite the generosity of these corporate entities, we will not be covering our costs by the end of year 1 as presently stands. The excess currently comes from our own pockets.
3) Most sites keep you logged in, by storing or caching all the information from your user session, it is insecure to store this at the client (if you have more than a forum to protect), although I would suspect this is what vBulletin (Pagga's boards) did to enable this. We could do this at the server level, but because of certain features of this advanced forum system we've selected, this would require considerably more server resource than we currently have, and until we're meeting costs on this system, we wont be upgrading.
Finally, I will state, that I am aware that this can be frustrating to the userbase, and have already asked that those users be patient as we work toward improving this part of the user experience. One solution is for us to store, datacache and encrypt your basic authentication details, against an encrypted "Key" which your computer automatically sends to the server every visit, this key then changes every time you login, preventing third parties interfering with your transmission. This works much the same as the keys in modern cars, that change code every turn of the key. There are problems inherent to this solution as to any, but its one possibility, and I want to show that we're aware of where we "Might" head to solve this issue.
However, there is plenty left to do at Rule7, and at the moment, with our new update due shortly, and new features to implement, the amount of development time required to do anything about this vs the amount of time it takes to re-enter login details, is quite a ratio, and makes this a lower priority than alot of things already on the development list.
Rule7: I just work here.
EOS: I just work there too.
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 07, 2008 5:26 PM
Posts: 135,
Visits: 279
|
|
| Thanks for the response James, very thorough. Let me make it absolutely clear that I very much appreciate the work that you, and others, are putting into this; any indications to the contrary are entirely due to sloppy writing on my part. My question actually should have been: "What, if anything, can I do to my system to make it work the same as yours?" Still, I'm happy to wait until the next Rule 7 upgrade before I go futzing around in my PC.
"When I want your opinion, I'll read it from your steaming entrails"
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing to see here.
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:05 PM
Posts: 451,
Visits: 1,942
|
|
| You're more than welcome. Let's wait until the next release of Rule7, if the problem then persists, i'll try to make some time to help you alter your system configuration, however if I understand this problem as well as I think I do (so probably not very much) I think you would be quite unlucky not to experience some improvement. I've made a few minor alterations tonight, which will fix this issue for a small minority of issues, but conversely you would be very lucky if you were one of these rarer cases.
Rule7: I just work here.
EOS: I just work there too.
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 10:06 AM
Posts: 153,
Visits: 1,638
|
|
I realise that is an old issue, that James has explained in depth, several times, but I find that when I quit Firefox at the end of the daythe "remember me" check box makes no difference as I am no longer be logged in when I restart Firefox the following morning.
Firefox 2.0b1
Mac OS X 10.4.7
This may an OS/Browser specific issue as I haven't tried to test in on other browsers on OS X 10.4.7 (I have another 16 I could try!)
Sorry for bothering you about this, my intention is to inform you rather than criticise.
Take care
Maelstrom: Henry Bentham, Alchemist, Flambard
LT: Solstice, Harts, Bards & Healers Guilds
RL: Mike (I think)
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing to see here.
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:05 PM
Posts: 451,
Visits: 1,942
|
|
Im well aware this happens, in order to maximise performance we purge all server processes every night. For instance if all 683 members logged in, hit remember me, and then never came back, it would fill memory that would never be released, so we release it all nightly. Requiring One login per day. In the future we may adjust this to maybe once per week, but for now I totally know why this happens and it is working as intended.
Rule7: I just work here.
EOS: I just work there too.
|
|
|
|
|
Apprentice
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 5:50 PM
Posts: 10,
Visits: 20
|
|
| Understood on all the above. Just to say though the "loggin forget occur every time to me. I'll let you know if the Rule-7 update does not fix it. Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 10:06 AM
Posts: 153,
Visits: 1,638
|
|
James (8/9/2006)
Im well aware this happens, in order to maximise performance we purge all server processes every night.
Ahh! Now it all makes sense - thanks for this info. In the light of this perhaps the "Remember me" button could be renamed something more helpful such as "Remember me for today"?
I suspect that confusion comes about from the behaviour of such a log in option on other forums (fora?) that I frequent.
Maelstrom: Henry Bentham, Alchemist, Flambard
LT: Solstice, Harts, Bards & Healers Guilds
RL: Mike (I think)
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing to see here.
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:05 PM
Posts: 451,
Visits: 1,942
|
|
angarmar (8/9/2006)
I'll let you know if the Rule-7 update does not fix it.
This has already happened, if it isnt fixed, you're browser or third party antivirus/spyware filter is deleting standard Cookies, and there's little/nothing we can do to help with that.
Rule7: I just work here.
EOS: I just work there too.
|
|
|
|