So happy to be able to contribute meaningfully to #Firefox59 💖❤🦊
My idea and patch to whitelist #decentralization protocols have made to the release notes. I am quite proud right now. I will keep working to make #Mozilla #Firefox a first-class platform for #dapps.
@soapdog congrats!
@Smolgrumps thanks a lot!!! <3
@soapdog bravo! is this related to FF allowing extensions to respond to IPFS requests?
@whjms if "responding to IPFS requests" you mean that `ipfs:` protocol schema can be used by add-ons implementing IPFS protocol then yes.
All this does is allow such protocols to be implemented, it doesn't implement them .
@soapdog nice work!
@soapdog Thank you for this.
@soapdog you can be proud, for sure
@soapdog Do you know if someone's already working on an IPFS extension by any chance?
@raucao yes, people are working on one called "ipfs-companion", it is on github but I don't have the link handy on my mobile. It is foss so you can contribute. Last time I checked it was under active work. 😁
@soapdog Hmm, I just had a look and it's just a big man-in-the-middle script, using the HTTP gateway of a local node. Would be nice to have something that *only* handles ipfs:// URIs. Still good to know that it exsits tho.
@raucao you can't solve it using another method because there are not TCP/UDP APIs available for WebExtensions, so we can't write the communication part of those p2p protocols.
Firefox OS had a nice TCP/UDP API, I wish they kept it in Gecko.
Unless IPFS, Dat and Scuttlebutt start speaking WebSocket or WebRTC or HTTP, we can't ship a full webextension solution. Or browsers could expose TCP/UDP for add-ons developer and then the sky is the limit.
@soapdog Hmm, yes that would be an issue. Chrome does allow it via https://developer.chrome.com/apps/sockets_tcp afaik, but should be standardized in Web Extensions, of course.
@soapdog If ipfs:// protocol support is detectable, then at least the companion extension could stop intercepting http:// requests tho...
@raucao I think right now, all they do is a redirect to one of their HTTP gateways, not sure. What kind of interception you're talking about? I might be out of date with how it works...
@soapdog I mean that right now it's looking at *all* HTTP requests, and intercepting the ones with URLs that *look like* they are IPFS web gateways, then using the local HTTP gateway for those. It's effectively just a hack that replaces remote IPFS gateways with the local one afaics.
@raucao I believe it is working like that because it was built before the patch I made. At that time, there was no other way.
@soapdog Yes, of course.
@soapdog Just recently contributed to the Exploit Database.
Congrats on the achievement my man I feel you!
@palone awesome work my friend. :-) thanks for helping keep us safe
@soapdog 👍