| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:06 |
|
aerozoic joined #minetest-hub |
| 00:18 |
rubenwardy |
UX designers who make CTRL+Y delete a line and CTRL+SHIFT+Y redo should be shot |
| 00:18 |
rubenwardy |
*CTRL+SHIFT+Z |
| 00:18 |
VanessaE |
heh |
| 00:19 |
VanessaE |
draw-and-quarter the bastards. :P |
| 00:27 |
Fixer |
use 20 mm AA guns on them |
| 01:09 |
|
MinetestSam joined #minetest-hub |
| 02:49 |
|
epod joined #minetest-hub |
| 03:02 |
|
calcul0n_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 05:11 |
|
pauloue joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:02 |
|
T4im joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:03 |
|
jas_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:10 |
|
cautiouspotato joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:54 |
|
jluc joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:25 |
|
BillyS joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:12 |
|
jas_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:13 |
|
FrostRanger joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:17 |
|
CWz joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:40 |
|
Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:59 |
nerzhul |
sofar: i think it's more complciated than this, because a mod is not a single file :) |
| 09:51 |
|
IcyDiamond joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:27 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:37 |
|
Unarelith joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:30 |
|
Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-hub |
| 13:09 |
|
_Xenon joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:31 |
BuckarooBanzai |
nerzhul: you talked about docker images for minetest recently, did you document that anywhere? I'm doing a writeup of my server-setup with docker and monitoring setup: https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?p=338413#p338413 |
| 14:31 |
nerzhul |
see README.md |
| 14:31 |
BuckarooBanzai |
:) ok |
| 14:32 |
BuckarooBanzai |
i see: https://github.com/minetest/minetest#docker thx :P |
| 14:32 |
nerzhul |
your grafana setup is quite nice, i though about a prometheus exported in engine itself but i don't checked the librairies we can use to do it natively |
| 14:32 |
nerzhul |
i think it can be nice :) |
| 14:34 |
BuckarooBanzai |
thought about it too and looked up some c-libraries for it but abandoned that due to lack of time :( |
| 14:34 |
BuckarooBanzai |
the lua solution is not that bad for now.. |
| 14:34 |
nerzhul |
i think we can do a nice thing with that but i prefer to wait for 5.0.0 to be released |
| 14:34 |
nerzhul |
yes but it requires a nodejs shit :p |
| 14:35 |
|
bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:35 |
BuckarooBanzai |
i would not say shit but it needs some dependencies, yes :) |
| 14:53 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:56 |
rubenwardy |
my grafana is currently broken |
| 14:56 |
rubenwardy |
nerzhul: I'd like that |
| 14:56 |
rubenwardy |
!mod [prometheus] |
| 14:56 |
MinetestBot |
rubenwardy: Prometheus [prometheus] - Metric uploader by rubenwardy - https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?t=18767 |
| 14:56 |
rubenwardy |
is a hack |
| 14:57 |
nerzhul |
yeah if another coredev support it we can try to implement a such thing in the next dev cycle (with SPCSM). I think 5.1.0 will be a technical release, and i think the dev cycle should not last more than 3 months |
| 14:57 |
|
scr267 joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:57 |
BuckarooBanzai |
i saw that before i made my prom/grafana setup but some metrics were missing in my opinion... |
| 14:57 |
nerzhul |
but we need to trigger the end of this cycle before |
| 14:58 |
nerzhul |
BuckarooBanzai: i think, we can discuss about this on the next dev cycle, i open an issue about it |
| 14:58 |
BuckarooBanzai |
nerzhul: no pressure :) |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
BuckarooBanzai: it was a lightweight set |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
CTF adds more https://github.com/MT-CTF/capturetheflag/blob/master/mods/ctf_metrics/init.lua |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
but other metrics would be nice |
| 15:01 |
nerzhul |
see #8004 |
| 15:01 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8004 -- Expose metrics for prometheus |
| 15:01 |
nerzhul |
we can add custom backend if it's possible permitting mods to push metrics (if possible) |
| 15:26 |
|
bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:58 |
ircSparky |
so, a external program can read minetest output, is there any way for minetest to read an externals program's input? |
| 15:58 |
ircSparky |
(in a csm) |
| 15:59 |
rubenwardy |
no |
| 15:59 |
rubenwardy |
this is due to security reasons |
| 16:06 |
|
Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-hub |
| 16:20 |
nerzhul |
irc no and this will be never implemented |
| 16:20 |
nerzhul |
CSM must be more secure than SSM |
| 17:04 |
sofar |
nerzhul: I don't see anything wrong with requiring spcsm's to be a single file (for now), and other local assets (textures etc) can just come through the media protocol too |
| 17:04 |
nerzhul |
assets are not intended to be used by CSM currently except on HUD |
| 17:05 |
sofar |
why that restriction? |
| 17:07 |
sofar |
e.g. csm sounds/particles - you're saying they can't use server-sent assets? |
| 17:22 |
|
aerozoic joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:58 |
|
DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:26 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:26 |
Krock |
hi imaginary tenplus1 |
| 18:39 |
|
IhrFussel joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:40 |
IhrFussel |
Some still compare "SSCM enable/disable flags" to Javascript ina browser which is totally NOT the same and I explained yesterday why it's not comparable |
| 18:41 |
IhrFussel |
I mean per callback flags |
| 18:41 |
IhrFussel |
Allow SSCM -> Yes / No is fine with me...THAT would actually be the same as Javascript in browsers |
| 18:42 |
IhrFussel |
You don't get to choose which JS functions run or don't run in a browser |
| 18:42 |
* Krock |
can confirm Minetest to be broken on Android 4.1 on a rooted phone with broken storage management and non-working camera.. not very reliable information |
| 18:42 |
IhrFussel |
You can only turn it on or off and don't have different restriction levels |
| 18:43 |
rubenwardy |
Krock: does stujones1's PR help? |
| 18:43 |
rubenwardy |
IhrFussel: no script can disable from sources |
| 18:43 |
Krock |
rubenwardy: tested that particular PR |
| 18:43 |
rubenwardy |
I think that it is probably overengineering to allow any feature to be disabled client-side |
| 18:43 |
Krock |
some other built-in apps also crash on startup due to the weird/broken storage management |
| 18:44 |
IhrFussel |
rubenwardy, it might be able to disable from sources but not disable certain callbacks in the browser and allow others...I never hard of an extension that lets you run var.indexOf() for example but not Jquery AJAX |
| 18:44 |
IhrFussel |
heard* |
| 18:45 |
IhrFussel |
The client should display on connect WHICH SSCM mods exactly are required to play together with a "risk indicator" |
| 18:46 |
IhrFussel |
That should be enough for the user to decide whether or not they want to play there |
| 18:47 |
IhrFussel |
That "risk indicator" needs to parse through each and every function/callback to determine the risk level...should be doable |
| 18:48 |
rubenwardy |
no |
| 18:48 |
rubenwardy |
that's a terrible idea, especially as the aim of CSM is to not have any risky functions |
| 18:49 |
IhrFussel |
Tell that nerzhul and others who seem to fear that their client might run bad SSCM depending on the functions/callbacks used |
| 18:49 |
Shara |
A risk indicator would be bad |
| 18:50 |
IhrFussel |
Then maybe a short description that explains what the SSCM will likely do (eg for what callback x is used) |
| 18:50 |
Fixer |
IhrFussel: you can control JS with noscript on many levels |
| 18:51 |
Fixer |
even on android, iirc |
| 18:52 |
IhrFussel |
For example "This mod is able to share chat messages between server and client" "This mod will be able to modify your HUD" |
| 18:52 |
Shara |
Anything that did aim at being malicious would just lie |
| 18:52 |
Shara |
Much much bvetter to make sure what is available is as secure as possible |
| 18:52 |
Shara |
better* |
| 18:53 |
IhrFussel |
Fixer, you can switch between enabled/disabled for each JS function? I doubt that and even if so who would even attempt that? Maybe only IT pros |
| 18:53 |
Shara |
Otherwise bad-mod says: "Hi, I am totally safe and harmless and just add pretty rainbows to the game!" |
| 18:53 |
Fixer |
IhrFussel: per domain, or block each function in ublock |
| 18:54 |
IhrFussel |
But the bare browsers only support JS on/off and that is what MT should also aim for as "bare" implementation without addons |
| 18:56 |
IhrFussel |
Servers will notice that certain features are not available for the client (cause the user disabled them) and likely kick them ... not sure how many server owners would be happy when they hear that certain clients might just work differently and that they have to take that into account |
| 18:59 |
IhrFussel |
Since the CM API (correct me if I'm wrong) has no file management implemented the risk of ACTUAL harm should be extremely low even if the sandbox has bugs ... without (free) file access how do you want to hijack/attack a client from the server side? |
| 19:00 |
IhrFussel |
How many server owners are educated hackers? I think the security concerns are a bit overblown |
| 19:02 |
IhrFussel |
Many server owners in the list don't even know how to mod MT |
| 19:03 |
IhrFussel |
I'm talking about those servers that only install stock mods and never customize any part in them |
| 19:04 |
Krock |
since when can I no longer block the waterfall using a torch? eww |
| 19:15 |
Fixer |
p h y s i c s |
| 19:20 |
nerzhul |
i nevered talked about risk indictateur |
| 19:26 |
IhrFussel |
I said you fear risks with SSCM |
| 19:38 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:48 |
* luk3yx |
thinks SSCMs should be heavily locked down and restricted, similar to LuaCs with access to some callbacks. |
| 19:49 |
rubenwardy |
they are |
| 19:50 |
IhrFussel |
If CSM doesn't really allow files (outside the mod folder?) or os.execute()/similar calls ... so how would a server owner even approach an attack? |
| 19:52 |
rubenwardy |
using a zero day, predominantly |
| 19:53 |
luk3yx |
SSCMs are... added? |
| 19:55 |
rubenwardy |
CMs are |
| 19:55 |
rubenwardy |
the CM api is heavily locked down |
| 20:04 |
|
Fixer_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:14 |
|
benrob0329 joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:39 |
|
FrostRanger joined #minetest-hub |
| 22:23 |
|
_Xenon joined #minetest-hub |
| 22:27 |
rubenwardy |
during deadline periods: tons of ideas for projects to do |
| 22:27 |
rubenwardy |
during relaxed periods: heh, can't think of anything to do. Let's watch Travelers again |
| 22:27 |
sfan5 |
write the ideas down, then never look at them again |
| 22:28 |
rubenwardy |
I actually do that |
| 22:28 |
rubenwardy |
they seem less appealing later, though |
| 22:35 |
sofar |
^^ |
| 22:35 |
rubenwardy |
things I want to do currently: finish converting ContentDB to bootstrap, and move the hosting of it to aws |
| 22:36 |
rubenwardy |
oh, and also play civ5 |
| 23:39 |
IhrFussel |
Hey I just thought about something... you require SSCMs to be known to the cdb? Which essentially means server owners cannot code their own "closed" source code |
| 23:41 |
rubenwardy |
correct |
| 23:41 |
rubenwardy |
to be allowed on repositories such as Debian, Minetest would need to allow the rejection of non-free code |
| 23:41 |
IhrFussel |
It means server owners HAVE TO use stock mods for SSCM |
| 23:41 |
rubenwardy |
actually, [citation needed] |
| 23:42 |
IhrFussel |
And cannot modify them for their needs...that sounds terrible |
| 23:43 |
rubenwardy |
my original idea was slightly more complex, but would allow server owners to distribute their own mods |
| 23:44 |
rubenwardy |
but it's a good idea to have a record of CMs used on public servers |
| 23:45 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-hub |
| 23:46 |
IhrFussel |
Only allowing stock mods for SSCM will heavily limit the possible usecases for servers ... I modify almost every mod I add to my server |
| 23:47 |
rubenwardy |
there's no such thing as a stock mod |
| 23:47 |
rubenwardy |
I can't be thinking about this right now, too much to do |
| 23:47 |
|
rubenwardy left #minetest-hub |
| 23:48 |
IhrFussel |
Of course there are stock mods? I mean the original mod from cdb which does NOT suit every servers needs |
| 23:48 |
IhrFussel |
So you modify them the way you want them as server owner |
| 23:49 |
IhrFussel |
I completely changed Mobs Redo api.lua for example to add genders to animals, levels, exp, new follow behavior, partly new AI ... my api.lua is completely different from the stock api.lua |
| 23:50 |
paramat |
? why would a server-sent mod have to be in the cdb, and why does that make it unmodifiable? |
| 23:50 |
IhrFussel |
paramat, he only wants to allow mods from the cdb as SSCM from what I heard |
| 23:51 |
paramat |
oh hm. that seems silly |
| 23:51 |
paramat |
no mod should be forced to be on cdb |
| 23:51 |
IhrFussel |
I guess for security reasons...to make sure the code cannot contain anything malicious... but not every server owners wants to distribute their custom mod code to cdb in order to be able to use it |
| 23:51 |
sofar |
hold on |
| 23:51 |
sofar |
wait a second |
| 23:52 |
paramat |
anyway, even if so, a server could create their own version and add it to the cdb |
| 23:52 |
IhrFussel |
Wouldn't that bloat the cdb? |
| 23:52 |
sofar |
the idea is that cdb is a 'trusted reviewer' that players can trust |
| 23:52 |
sofar |
but everyone could choose to "trust" another 'reviewer' |
| 23:52 |
sofar |
that reviewer could be a server owner, too |
| 23:52 |
paramat |
any open source mod can be checked for malicious code |
| 23:53 |
sofar |
the only thing is, cdb would be the default trusted reviewer |
| 23:53 |
paramat |
yep |
| 23:53 |
IhrFussel |
Imagine 20 servers modifying the same mod and adding it to the cdb...wow now you have 21 versions of the same mod with slightly different behavior |
| 23:53 |
sofar |
but for instance, for testing purposes, you can, as a server owner, always 'trust' your own 'review' |
| 23:53 |
sofar |
review takes time |
| 23:54 |
sofar |
so if too many csm's are needing to reviewed, that will take longer |
| 23:54 |
paramat |
well, i won't accept forcing sscsm mods to be on the cdb :) |
| 23:54 |
sofar |
so it's not in the best interest of server owners to do that |
| 23:54 |
|
tumeninodes joined #minetest-hub |
| 23:54 |
IhrFussel |
I don't think he wants to let server owners decide which SSCM they execute/send ... he can correct me if he reads this later and thinks I'm wrong |
| 23:54 |
sofar |
also my estimate is that server owners != sscsm writers |
| 23:54 |
sofar |
there's some overlap, but it's not 1:1 |
| 23:55 |
sofar |
some cm writers are server owners |
| 23:55 |
tumeninodes |
oh... so server owners make/tweak mods for their server, and don't share the code with the rest of the community? hmmm |
| 23:56 |
sofar |
they would have to have their cm's reviewed by cdb, or players wouldn't by default be able to run those cms |
| 23:56 |
sofar |
yes you can still sign your own cm's but not many players will ever run it |
| 23:56 |
IhrFussel |
sofar, imagine this case: server owner loads "stock mod" x and changes its behavior a little to suit the server's gameplay more ... now the mod can't be send to the client anymore cause it has been modified unless that version with just a few SERVER-SPECIFIC tweaks gets distributed which makes zero sense |
| 23:56 |
sofar |
no |
| 23:56 |
sofar |
that's not how it will work |
| 23:56 |
sofar |
if you modify a cm then it needs to be resigned |
| 23:57 |
sofar |
if you sign it yourself, you need to provide your pubkey to clients yourself |
| 23:57 |
sofar |
and clients need to manually import it |
| 23:57 |
sofar |
you can still send the modified mods, at any time |
| 23:58 |
IhrFussel |
I'm pretty sure rubenwardy has in mind that the cdb/devs need to be able to check that code before it can be send to clients... otherwise any server could just sign any potentially malicious code/mod |
| 23:58 |
sofar |
no |
| 23:59 |
sofar |
I'm fairly sure rubenwardy agrees with me that it must be possible for developers to sign their own code so they can test their own code |
| 23:59 |
tumeninodes |
a malicious server owner... who ever heard of such a thing?? :P |
| 23:59 |
sofar |
but like I said, no normal player will ever see that code run |
| 23:59 |
sofar |
since they do not have the certificate for "developer signed" on their system |
