Re-enabled noscript's ABE option after connecting to Ubuntu One. Attempting to reconnect with the ABE option seemed to cause the crash...

[scrollo]

Binary package hint: ubuntuone-client

The ABE option in noscript needs to be disabled for some of Ubuntu One. I'd re-enabled it while playing around with the Ubuntu One tray icon (connecting/disconnecting) as I wanted to see if disabling it was only necessary during registration. Crash report appeared while connecting.

ProblemType: Bug
.home.scrollo..cache.ubuntuone.log.oauth.login.log: Starting Ubuntu One client version 1.0.2
.home.scrollo..config.ubuntuone.ubuntuone.client.conf:
 [ubuntuone]
 show_applet = 1
 connected = False
 connect = 0
 bookmarked = True
Architecture: i386
CheckboxSubmission: 50f267aca6f08a4eca8125c7f9058784
CheckboxSystem: edda5d4f616ca792bf437989cb597002
Date: Thu Nov 5 22:29:41 2009
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 9.10 "Karmic Koala" - Release i386 (20091028.5)
NonfreeKernelModules: fglrx
Package: ubuntuone-client 1.0.2-0ubuntu2
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-14.48-generic
SourcePackage: ubuntuone-client
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-14-generic i686

[Rick McBride (rmcbride)]

Hi!

Thanks for the feedback on this issue. The ABE feature of NoScript is apparently just completely incompatible with our service. It's not really a bug with Ubuntu One, but rather in the way that particular feature of that particular plugin (which I use myself) interacts with web applications that also interact with the system. There's not really a way to code around it, but there's probably a way to fix it in the ABE feature's configuration.

In any case it's outside the scope of what we can fix in the client.

I'm leaving the bug open in the event that someone in the community has the knowledge to create some sort of rule for this plugin. It's not something that we plan to address directly, however.

[scrollo (invisibleaxeman)]

Hi, yeah I thought this would be outside of what you could fix from that side, changing your code to somehow circumvent a firewall can be a bit tricky!

I played around with NoScripts ABE configuration and managed to get something that works and doesn't popup those blocked messages. Not sure at all if this is safe or not but it allowed me to keep the ABE feature enabled and I can now access my storage with no apparent problems. I trust the sites involved so hopefully all will be well...

In Noscript->Options->ABE

Select USER from Rulesets, then click Edit.

Paste the following into the file and save (ensure there is ONE newline at the end only, more or less seems to give a parsing error in the noscript options dialog).

Site login.launchpad.net
Accept ALL from one.ubuntu.com
Accept ALL from login.launchpad.net
Deny

If someone reading this knows this to be a bad rule, please let me know with all haste! :o))

[Rick McBride (rmcbride)]

scrollo wrote:
> Hi, yeah I thought this would be outside of what you could fix from that
> side, changing your code to somehow circumvent a firewall can be a bit
> tricky!
>
> I played around with NoScripts ABE configuration and managed to get
> something that works and doesn't popup those blocked messages. Not sure
> at all if this is safe or not but it allowed me to keep the ABE feature
> enabled and I can now access my storage with no apparent problems. I
> trust the sites involved so hopefully all will be well...
>
> In Noscript->Options->ABE
>
> Select USER from Rulesets, then click Edit.
>
> Paste the following into the file and save (ensure there is ONE newline
> at the end only, more or less seems to give a parsing error in the
> noscript options dialog).
>
> Site login.launchpad.net
> Accept ALL from one.ubuntu.com
> Accept ALL from login.launchpad.net
> Deny
>
> If someone reading this knows this to be a bad rule, please let me know
> with all haste! :o))
>
That seems reasonable in regards to how I understand ABE to work. We
certainly don't want to try to circumvent a firewall-like module with
our code, that would be probably not taken very well.

Thanks for poking at this and finding what looks like a perfectly good
work around.

[Joshua Hoover (joshuahoover)]

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. This particular bug has already been reported and is a duplicate of bug 458393, so it is being marked as such. Please look at the other bug report to see if there is any missing information that you can provide, or to see if there is a workaround for the bug. Additionally, any further discussion regarding the bug should occur in the other report. Feel free to continue to report any other bugs you may find.