Is there any chrome extention, which will detect any webste's cms (such: wp/ joonla), plateform such: php/asp etc.
even help to get any more information.
I need now such type detector.
Here are two extensions that will detect Javascript libraries or CMS frameworks that are being used by a site:
Frameworks and Appspector
You aren't going to find an extension that shows whether PHP or ASP are used because those are server-side technologies and they don't consistently send anything to the client that would enable an extension to detect with 100% accuracy that they are being used.
Related
When looking up Electron and Offline HTML5, I have found it difficult to make a decision between which one to use for a project.
Assuming that a user will have to go to a certain website to download the Electron application, and would have to go to the same website to get the Offline HTML5 loaded, what are the pros and cons between using one over the other?
Some that I could think of:
Offline HTML5 can be updated without the user consciously updating their application by just making the user go to the online page again.
Electron would eliminate the need to code around multiple browser/browser version dependencies and quirks
It really depends on your exact requirements. The following is a list of everything that I came up with:
electron supports module system (i.e. require) both in main and renderer processes.
electron provides you access to OS APIs (e.g. fs). Without such many node modules will not work in the JS runtime of the browser (e.g. ip).
updating your app with electron is as easy as sending an http request. (or even better as described here)
an HTML 5 offline app requires a browser and the user might just give it IE6.
electron integrates with native desktop environment (see dialog, power-save-blocker, shell or even app for some examples)
electron enhances some of HTML5 APIs such as file API
electron lets you modify the default behavior of underlying chromium. For example you could intercept all URLs with file scheme and modify them on the fly*.
In short if you want your app to have a good native integration and act deterministic (i.e. no browser quirks) I suggest choosing electron.
*electron-jade for example takes use of protocol API to compile all files ending with .jade on the fly without the need to prior compilation.
DISCLAIMER: I am the developer of electron-jade.
(I have a problem with Google Chrome improvements that will drop support for my current solutions.)
I work on project where I move desktop system to an Intranet web application.
The crucial requirements are:
to move desktop system to a web application
to reproduce every single functionality from the desktop system in the webapp
While 95% of work requires creating casual web application, there is one thing which is non-standard to handle: my application must perform some actions on the client computer. These includes:
connecting with libraries
launching desktop apps
file manipulation in background
The example scenario is to integrate my system with some machine in the lab. I have to integrate my web application with drivers on client computer via DLL (desktop app did this, so my app have to do this as well).
Theoretically scenarios of the desktop actions may vary and I just want to implement some interface that will handle all the "client-machine" job the desktop app has done, so there is no need to work on every single scenario (but of course every scenario should be tested).
My solution was Java Applet. It worked. But then Google Chrome decided to drop support for NPAPI plugins, so in September'15 Java plugin (and my applet) won't be supported (http://blog.chromium.org/2014/11/the-final-countdown-for-npapi.html).
So my another solution is Java Web Start. It works. But now Google Chrome decided to drop support for background operations of external protocols (https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=348640), so from Google Chrome 45 my Java Web Start solution won't be supported.
(Both above solutions work on Firefox and IE.)
The question:
What other technology can I use to interact with a client machine from my web app?
Other remarks:
I am reluctunt to write my own PPAPI plugin or Chrome Extension - I prefer one solution working on all major browsers.
I know that StackOverflow community does not like discussions about technologies, so please focus on describing possible solution to my problem.
We struggled with a similar problem as we need to connect/access electronic devices over JNI->DLL. The only technology where this is currently possible are applets. Period. (And even that is tricky since certain combinations of browsers/java versions/operating systems do not work or have problems, but this is another story...)
There are web technologies like HTLM5, JScript which can replace some functionalities of applets however in certain scenarios (like yours) there is no current alternative available - and you named some of those:
connecting with libraries like *.dll, *.so etc.
file manipulations
launching applications
And doing that across browsers and operating systems!
Solutions?
Tell your users that certain browsers can't be used (like Chrome and
Opera Next)
Write individual plugins for each browser (which probably is beyond your budget ;-)
Did you consider writing standalone application(s) in form of an executable file? The user must download and run it however e.g. java or plugins also need to be installed. But then there is the security aspect of that (downloading an and executing an executable file) - certainly not an easy decision
Have a look at FireBreath 2 - (just read about it in some posts, however didn't try it)
There are lots of discussions on SO to this topic so take a read:
alternative technologies to replace applets
applet alternative launch from browser
alternatives to java applet to launch microsoft office applications
alternative-java-applet-network-drive-access
what are the alternatives for java applet to launch client programs using chrome
alternative of npapi plugins for flash java applet
python alternative to java applet
npapi alternative for live file editing
... and many, many more!
I would like to create a new Chrome extension which will be distributed via Chrome store. I also would like to port some code parts of this extension to native code and to use Chrome's native client for it.
So my questions - is it possible to create solution which
comprises of two components - Chrome extension (e.g. can embed content scripts to third party sites like google.com) and native client (e.g. run some native code).
should have these two components be able to interact with each other e.g. via message passing (https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/messaging)
is distributed via Chrome Store as a single unit.
Thanks in advance.
There are two similarly named but quite different technologies.
Native Hosts. Those are separate programs, that cannot be distributed in the Web Store, and talk to your JavaScript with Native Messaging, a variant of standard Messaging API.
Native Client modules (NaCl/PNaCl). Those work like browser plugins, and they can be bundled with the extension.
Note that they are sandboxed from the system - the idea here is performance gain or non-trivial non-HTML UI inside the browser.
Inside your extension, you create an <embed> element that creates an instance of your native code module. JavaScript code can interact with (P)NaCl code with DOM events.
This page contains a guide on using NaCl in Chrome Apps, and mentions that the same applies to extensions. I haven't seen any better documentation, so you'll need to experiment and search around a bit.
I'm writing a small chrome extension for personal use and I would like to run an executable via the context menu and pass certain information as arguments to said executable.
What the simplest and/or cleanest way to achieve this? To me it seems that it is impossible due to chrome's sandboxing.
This can be accomplished via NPAPI Plugins.
Code running in an NPAPI plugin has the full permissions of the
current user and is not sandboxed or shielded from malicious input by
Google Chrome in any way. You should be especially cautious when
processing input from untrusted sources, such as when working with
content scripts or XMLHttpRequest.
However, I should also include their warning.
Warning
NPAPI is being phased out. Consider using alternatives.
NPAPI is a really big hammer that should only be used when no other
approach will work.
via Start an external application from a Google Chrome Extension?
Alternatives to NPAPI
There are several alternatives to NPAPI. In cases where standard web
technologies are not yet sufficient, developers and administrators can
use NaCl, Apps, Native Messaging API, and Legacy Browser Support to
transition from NPAPI. Moving forward, our goal is to evolve the
standards-based web platform to cover the use cases once served by
NPAPI.
via http://blog.chromium.org/2013/09/saying-goodbye-to-our-old-friend-npapi.html
Another way, suggested here, is with Java.
Java applets: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/
Implementing Policy: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/security/userperm/policy.html
Use sendNativeMessage:
There is chrome.runtime.sendNativeMessage which can be used to send a
message to a native application and chrome.runtime.connectNative which
allows for a more persistent connection.
So, you can't directly execute a command, but you can have a native
app do it for you.
You can find more info on Native Messaging in the docs.
via https://stackoverflow.com/a/19917672/1085891
Is it possible to write a Chrome Extension that will interact with a Native Client application?
I use Irssi through the NaCl Secure Shell application, and I would like to write an extension that simply looks for plain URLs and makes them clickable links.
I'm seeing some strange behavior with extensions and NaCl applications, so I wanted to know if this is something that is even possible.
Additionally, if anyone has a more elegant solution to this, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Thanks!
The fact that the NaCl Secure Shell app uses Native Client under the hood shouldn't matter; the page is rendered using standard HTML.
The documentation for Chrome Extensions here says you should be able to inject content scripts into pages with the chrome-extension scheme. I tried it, but it doesn't work. It seems the documentation is incorrect. See http://crbug.com/153245.
As far as I can tell, it is not possible to modify an extension this way. It is possible to communicate with other extensions/apps (see here), but it seems that the application must expose an API to communicate with.
Secure Shell supports clicking links now via Ctrl+Click. it will support OSC+8 in a future release.