I am developing a light weight chrome extension . Of the late downloading the extension from webstore is giving Error with " Download Interrupted " alert and failed server problem in download file.
On checking the chrome://net-internals/#events , I found the following log . I am unable to decipher what it means . perhaps can help somebody else explain me what is going wrong here .
I am using Chrome beta Version 39.0.2171.42 beta (64-bit) and stable Version 38.0.2125.111 (64-bit). Error occurs on both and also occurs for my extension users .
I understand that it is a problem of cache and I am able to successfully load the extension after clearing cache and in incognito mode . However I am looking for a more stable and user understandable solution for my clients .
Are you signed into multiple Google accounts? Have you published the extension only to testers?
If the answer to either of those questions is yes (though it doesn't sound likely, since you said it works in incognito mode), then what might be happening is the account that's signed in as primary isn't one that you've added as a tester. In this case (for me) download fails.
Related
I just started experimenting with the .NET framework and I noticed that when I run:
dotnet list packagein the JavaScript Debug Terminal of VS Code I get all my packages as I should but they have strange Links attached to some of them that lead to scam sites.
ex:
> Windows.EntityFrameworkCore.SQlite --> ww1 .entityframework.com which is a shitty site pretending to be .NET hiring developers.
....
enter image description here
I tried running anti virus scans and cleanups. Nothing detected.
I tested on PowerShell, GitBash and Cmd terminals. Nothing, only happens in the JavaScript Debug Terminal
I tried disabling all my VS Code extensions (including the built-in ones) except the JavaScript debugger to see if its coming form another extension. Still there.
I have heard of extension vulnerabilities and VS Code Hacks but this is a built-in plugin.
Has this happened to anyone?
VSCode is configured to attempt to parse strings from any output that could represent a valid URL and present the option to you as a clickable link for convenience.
Since .tools is a valid TLD, it thinks the string Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Tools is referencing the URL http://microsoft.entityframeworkcore.tools/ which it seems has been parked by an unscrupulous individual or organization. You as the developer should understand that this is a namespace reference and not a URL, and thus there is no value in clicking it.
This is not indicative of any sort of malware or any real malfeasance.
I am trying to build a Blazor application and I always get the following error :
"This site can’t provide a secure connectionlocalhost uses an unsupported protocol.
ERR_SSL_VERSION_OR_CIPHER_MISMATCH
Unsupported protocol
The client and server don't support a common SSL protocol version or cipher suite."
My Chrome browser is up to date. I tried with Edge but the same error !
I tried the following link, too :
https://phoenixnap.com/kb/fix-err-ssl-version-or-cipher-mismatch
Until a day all was working fine and I don't know what happened...
If I run the same application on another Windows 7 PC, it is working fine...
Can you help me, please ?
I will put here a screen capture :
Same problem for me.
Working with VS19
Tried a lot of things such as:
deleting localhost certificates,
repairing IIS Express 10,
clearing browser data and certificates cache,
deleting .vs folder,
allowing every TLS and SSL options in the browser
My .NET Core web apps are working under IE. So my guess is also that it's a Chrome update problem. But I haven't found how to fix that. :-(
Experienced the same issue. Managed to get it sorted by downloading IIScrypto and enabling the Best practices TLS and Cipher versions.
You can use firefox
Firefox: about:config "tls" > security.tls.version.min=1. Reset to 3 after completion.
Install Firefox.
Type "About:config" in the address bar and hit return.
Click "Accept the risk" and continue.
Type "tls" in the search bar and hit return.
Click the pencil icon at the far right of "security.tls.version.min" to edit the cutoff setting prevening your login, which is currently 3.
Type "1" and hit return.
I have the same problem. I work with Windows 7 Visual Studio 2019 browser chrome. The problem was solved in this way:
Open the project properties - debugging - uncheck the box "use SSL".
Looks like starting from the Google Chrome 63 loading self-signed crx file fails with a message: "This extension may have been corrupted".
From the browser logs I see that Chrome is trying to check the verified contents from the store, and, of course, failing.
content_hash_fetcher.cc(252)] Missing verified contents for cfbklnofppkbgcfhppceodfodekoecoa, fetching...
job failed for cfbklnofppkbgcfhppceodfodekoecoa reason:1
VerifyFailed cfbklnofppkbgcfhppceodfodekoecoa reason:1
That's happening for all extensions I can check.
Self-signed crx were disabled on reloading Chrome for a while now, but that was mostly OK for basic testing. Now it seems to be not possible at all.
Is there a way to install extensions for testing on Chrome 63?
Installing unpacked extensions works (for now), but that's not the same as installing crx. We had some issues which were not happening with unpacked extensions, mostly with init and storages.
UPD: the issue is tracked here https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=794219
Not sure exactly why this is happening, but the "fix" for us was to put a dummy update_url key in the manifest.json for the extension:
"update_url": "https://www.google.com"
Any old URL will do.
Warning: You will need to remove this before deploying to the Chrome Web Store as it might break your users' upgrade process.
Chrome bug this is the chrome bug tracking this issue. Please star it so that it gets some attention https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=794219
Also not sure if this will continue to work in the future.
An article on Chrome OS that I read here:
https://medium.com/#JamesCridland/review-five-months-with-a-chromebook-for-web-development-writing-and-more-8adf36b4a061
says:
"Update: Above, I mention that I use SSH and vi to do my programming work. And I did. Except I don’t any more. It turns out that one of the newer updates added direct SFTP access into the Files app (the equivalent of Explorer or Finder), so that my development box appears simply as another drive on my Chromebook. And Caret is an excellent programmer’s editor. So now I have a proper programmer’s editor (as well as the SSH terminal I need to put those changes live)."
Ok. But, when I go into Chrome OS's files app, the apparent way 'mount' my equiv of his
'development box' is via 'add new services', which is launching a webstore-app named 'SFTP' (whose icon is a blue folder outline with "SFTP" on it). i,e.:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/sftp-file-system/gbheifiifcfekkamhepkeogobihicgmn?hl=en
(My equiv of his 'development box' I'm assuming to be my web-server at bluehost.com, where I currently use Firefox's FireFTP extension, on Win-10.)
I can't get this 3-stars webstore 'SFTP' app (authored by someone from Japan) to authenticate me into my bluehost acc't. So, now I'm wondering whether
this 'SFTP' app is even the right thing to have installed, due to all the one- and two-star showstopper reviews. One typical review by a guy named Tim says:
"It's a nice try, but I really wish someone who knows what they're doing would make this service. It looks like it works but if you drill down more than a few folders deep on the remote filesystem, operations slow to a crawl."
Similarly, the two clients ('sFTP client' and 'sFTP client Lite) also have such low ratings, that my gut says that Google has failed to deliver a robust web-developer infrastructure.
Come on Google...you need to implement this stuff under your own logo.
Am I missing something???
Probably should advertise this functionality better :), but the Secure Shell App supports mounting via SFTP so it will appear in the Files app.
Steps to use:
Install Secure Shell Chrome extension.
Launch the extension (look for it in the bar to the right of the omnibox/browser URL bar -- it'll have a black terminal icon).
Enter the connection details to create a new profile.
Give it a description like "user#foo.com".
Instead of clicking "Connect" in the bottom right, click "Mount".
Authenticate with the server (keys/pass/whatever).
Once it finishes, it'll now be visible in the Files app.
If you suspend/resume the system or otherwise logout/reboot, you'll need to relaunch Secure Shell, select the saved profile, and then click "Mount" again. We probably should make this a bit smoother, but that's how it works currently.
No, not an answer yet...just more wishlist stuff:
Ok, more recent info about the Firefox browser's "FireFTP" addon:
It no longer works on the (new) std Firefox browser, as of a couple of
weeks ago when version 57.0 was released. (No biggie tho...a goggle revealed
a new-to-me browser called 'Waterfox' and it nicely supports FireFTP and the
other addons that Firefox dropped support for.)
So a bit more research yielded only yet more 'mumble-mode' confusion: it revealed that FireFTP is open source...located here:
https://github.com/mimecuvalo/fireftp
(So I submitted a new 'issue' there and asked about porting it to Chrome.)
I'm desperate, and recently test-drove Google's new Pixelbook.
(Sigh...nothing inspirational came of that...I give it one-thumb-down rating.
Here's my notes from that experience:
------------ Review notes of Pixelbook: ----------------------
Google didn’t think to include a USB-C to USB-A adapter. (A $2 item. e.g.)
https://www.amazon.com/Remax-USB3-1-Female-Adapter-Silver/dp/B01MCSRSKN/
That was my 'showstopper'...like a few other reviewers said...it's not well
thought out / matured. To me it feels more like a gimmick, than a product.
At a minimum, it rates my newest hashtag: #NRFPT (not ready for prime time).
I found no obvious way to disable the touchpad, when using a mouse.
In fact, no other reviewers expressed interest in using a mouse. (???)
Lastly, my favorite kind of Android apps are 'widgets', and I see no signs
that it has occurred to Google to allow Chrome-OS's desktop/background to
host any widgets.
Ok, I'm still in mumble-mode...and still in search of a FTP/SFTP GUI client for
the Chrome browser / Chrome-OS that is the quality of FireFTP.
Enable Linux(beta) on your chromebook. Then you can do whatever you want like on others linux machine.
A simple sftp connection command
sftp [user#]host
Enable linux and mount with sshfs
sudo apt install sshfs
then
sshfs -o reconnect,ServerAliveInterval=15,ServerAliveCountMax=3 user#xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:/remotedir localdir
or with key auth
sshfs -o reconnect,ServerAliveInterval=15,ServerAliveCountMax=3,IdentityFile=~/.ssh/id_rsa user#xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:/remotedir localdir
These will reconnect after resuming from sleep
My adblock extension was acting buggy, so I uninstalled it. When I went to reinstall it, it got stuck on "Checking". And it never moves past it. Whenever I try to restart the download, it says that I already have it downloading.
I've tried resetting things, I've restarted my browser, signed off of my google account. Everything I can think of and that I've seen suggested.
If anyone reads this, try turning off "Use Hardware Acceleration" in your chrome settings. Use search to find it on settings menu. Fixed the issue on my VM.
There is a discussion in the adblock forum about this issue. I don't know if you have already seen this, but I think it is worth looking at; as there are several suggestions on how to resolve this.
Try the development version.
Change the download location specified in chrome.
Check if you are logged with your users in store.
Hope this helps.
Steps to resolve:
Completely stop Chrome (you'll need to exit Chrome in your task bar even after closing the Chrome window).
Rename your Extension State directory to Extension State.bak.
Restart Chrome.
Below is the path of the Extension State directory on Windows:
C:\Users\<user_name>\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Extension State
See Where does Chrome store extensions? for the Extension State path on other operating systems.