Hi all,
I'm trying to read the content of a #Redirect page for documentation. I
try transclusion, like "{{:RedirectPageName}}" but I only get the
content of the redirected page (well, what else to expect...).
How can I fetch the text "#REDIRECT [[some page title]]" from the
redirect page without getting redirected... ?
TIA,
// Rolf Lampa
I'm reading this:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Documentation:Security#Upload_security
I still want to make the system as safe as possible so that a hacker can never upload anything malicious and run it. Our server was compromised but that was through someone who was using an unsafe CMS.
Is there anything like, setting the Uploads directory to a directory that is outside the WWW root, so even if a hacker uploads a scipt, he cant run it using the browser, because its not accessible?
And also I guess we should set the permissions of that directory to be non-executable, but writebable by all?
thanks
Eric
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Please, no screams and moans. I acknowledge I'm an idiot for trying to do
this instead of switching to Apache.
I'm trying to implement IMG_AUTH on an IIS machine. The problem I'm having
is mapping a subdirectory to a php script (I've already figured out the
issues with PATH_INFO). Is there:
1. Anyone out there who has successfully done this
2. Anyone who knows if this is not possible and can save me the time
and effort.
While this is solely an IIS problem, I cannot figure a way to do the
equivalent of the httpd.conf command:
"Alias /MediaWiki/images /path/to/img_auth.php"
Thus allowing img_auth.php to stream any requests sent to the server, eg.
http://wiki.montcopa.org/MediaWiki/images/01/01/example.txt
Please note the way img_auth works is to use the PATH_INFO environment
variable (which would be anything after MediaWiki/images/ in this case) to
parse and stream the file to the requestor.
Your help would be greatly appreciated.
Jack D. Pond
CIO, Montgomery County, PA
"Technology is a tool that implements your will, it is not a structure that
dictates your actions." -- Jack Pond
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Chrisman [mailto:roger@rogerchrisman.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 11:47 PM
>To: 'MediaWiki announcements and site admin list'
>Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] New to this.
>
>Mike wrote:
>> I don't even know what Apache and Php are
>
>The silence at the edge of the forest is seductive. Hold Google close.
A great adventure lies before you.
Fred
Hi,
I made sure that the changes I made were in MediaWiki:common.js and
MediaWiki:monobook.js, though if what Rob says is correct, then I might
not be able to make any changes to enable the JavaScripting, because
that may not have been implemented until 1.8, and I can't upgrade to
anything past 1.6.10 because my server won't upgrade to PHP5 at this time.
Can anyone confirm what Rob surmised, that enabling the JavaScript
wasn't do-able until 1.8?
Thanks,
-Azurite
Our users are annoyed with the successful login confimation page. They
are demanding that instead of showing the page and forcing them to
click on the link or wait 10 seconds, the target page be displayed.
This way, response time will improve and so will usability.
I'd like some help, if possible, on a way to make the output of a page
go to $wgOut, but following all steps that would be followed if the
page were served normally. I mean, without taking some shortcuts that
might make it to parse differently.
I would change function successfulLogin() in SpecialUserlogin.
Now it calls, among other things:
$wgOut->returnToMain( $auto, $this->mReturnTo );
I'd like to change this to put into $wgOut the correct output for the
page with the title $this->mReturnTo.
Any hint will be appreciated.
We are using an implementation of mediawiki to provide policy and
procedure documentation to staff, it is a 'half open wiki' in that we
are using the 'stableversions' extension to mark a version of each page
as 'appoved' which is the default shown to staff if they are not logged
in, whilst still allowing them to make changes / updates to the next
version if they are log in.
This works fine internally but we have been asked to look at using an
externally facing wiki to host a set of policy & procedures that will be
shared by a number of statuary organisations, the only real problem with
this is that anything that we make visible externally needs to in both
English and Welsh.
All of our editors would be working in english, so we would develop and
approve in English and then translate to welsh.
Has anyone any recommendations on how we could achieve this particularly
with a need to know when pages have been changed and so require
re-translating.
Thanks
John
Folks,
My mediawiki (1.6.10) is setup with custom LDAP modules to allow our company's domain controller to validate user login password authentication. This is very nice because the wiki is for internal use only and my users don't have the hassle of having to register with the wiki. They can just log on and use it. Unfortunately, the wiki does not know their Real Names and email address (which I can fetch very easily)
My question is:
If I (as the wikidb/site admin) know all the real names and email address of my company's users, how can I update their wiki user profiles directly? -- saving them the hassle.
thanks in advance
- rich (revansx)
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:10:55 +1000 "Brianna Laugher"
<brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>Telstra is using MediaWiki, huh? Very cool! :)
Thanks Brianna, It was a one man (me) project which after I finished
with our group got gobbled up by the corporate behemoth that all
companies must endure.
Categories: Thank-you. Solved. You are a gem.
>> Q: Can you have closed user categories/groups?
>Do you mean categories that only sysops can add items to? No.
>It's not clear what you're trying to ask.
Closed User Goups. We would like to force that only certain users (we
don't mind selecting them manually or via LDAP) can view/add/edit a
category.
This company has many groups(as most do) and it would not serve to
reason to allow, for instance, a level one tech support to
create/edit/view certain Human Resources or Legals
documents/information/policy pages.
I am not talking about sysops. I think I am talking about segregating
viewing/editing/adding privelidges in certain categories from
individuals or groups.
I have looked at socialtext.com and they (google-esque blade rack. bleh)
seem to be able to do this and this is based on mediawiki.
Since yesterday this has become a huge issue that I am highly concerned
with. By the end of next week this will become unmanagable and the
project will be shut down by my own hand which will be a great win for
me professionally(although a personal dissapointment) but a loss for the
company ?-|
Any ideas?
Regards,
Wayne