i use jdownloads
i have a collection which is rare and for now iam protecting my download area which user downloads premium file via php , but here is the problem that my premium user which for now access the links but the links are not resume supported , i dont want my users find out the exact files location and i want them to download resume supported links for their download session , any suggestion?
if we disable the download dir protection one premium user may share the link and everyone may download the file ... so i need protection(download using php) and resume supported links
???
Related
I would like to show a preview of the file contained in the pasteboard inside my sandboxed app. I'm able to do this using the QuickLookThumbnailing package.
Unfortunately, this requires a read access and does not work for files that are not inside the basics folders, such as Download, Video, Photo and Music.
For other cases I will get the error couldn't issue sandbox extension com.apple.app-sandbox.read for '<path to file>'
I understood that in the sandbox design, file's access are supposed to be approve from the user somehow.
But in other application (sandboxed too), I can paste a file without being prompted for any confirmation.
How do they do this ?
Finder never provide a Security-Scoped Bookmark inside the pasteboard.
You don't get a security scoped bookmark but a path/URL that has read/write rights granted. You then create a security scoped bookmark and store it for subsequent access. This works for the general pasteboard (copy-paste) as well as for the drag clipboard.
I've found that with https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive scope, my app can read all existing files (and their contents) in a Google Drive, but when I auth the app, it says that this scope can also delete files in the drive and I don't want to grant that.
I know that by itself https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.file only allows the app to read files created by the app itself or especially granted access.
I've tried other combinations, but can't find one where the the app can read the contents of any file I can see, but can't delete anything. This is the closest I've come:
https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.metadata
https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.file
https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.activity
https://www.googleapis.com/auth/documents
Is there a combination that will achieve my goal?
Based on your needs, you should be eyeing https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.readonly. This enables you to read the file metadata and content.
Allows read-only access to file metadata and file content.
Resource:
Scopes
There isn't one if you have access to read and write to a file then you will also have access to delete that file.
Its how they have permissions setup.
If you don't want to upload and only download try drive readonly.
scopes#drive
If you're not intending to create any files or save any data to Drive, then you have the https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.readonly scope.
Note that this is a restricted scope that will grant your app with read-only access to the user's entire Drive, but it will also prevent your app from creating any new files or editing existing ones.
If you want your application to be able to access the entire Drive, and you're planning to release your app to the public, you should submit your application to a restricted scope verification and security assessment; otherwise your app will be limited to 100 users, and users will see a warning while your app is unverified.
Here's more information:
OAuth 2.0 Scopes for Google APIs - Drive API, v3
Additional Requirements for Specific API Scopes section in the Google API Services User Data Policy
OAuth API verification FAQs
[google-people] I have an Android app that I recently published to the play store. I got an error while trying to publish the app that read: "You told us your app doesn't comply with the Location permissions policy". I am not sure what this means, but here is some context about my situation.
My app, the one I tried to publish is a flavor of another app. So, I have a Main app and a copy of Main(the flavor app). The copy contains all the features and functionalities of the Main app, with modifications to the colors and assets of the app. For this copy(flavor app) I did not require background location so I removed it from it's manifest. I did not remove it from Main's manifest. Just the copy(flavor app). So, Main app's manifest has the the background location permission enabled, but the copy(flavor app) does not.
Is it because my flavor app does not have the background location permission enabled? According to the developers page:
"Manifest files that were part of the build but did not contribute elements or attributes are listed under Other Manifest Files on the right." So, although Main's manifest gets merged into the flavors, it does not contribute elements or attributes to the final apk buid of the flavor.
I would highly appreciate some clarification and understanding to this issue.
Please see attached image or go to: https://developer.android.com/studio/build/manifest-merge#implicit_system_permissions?
According to the Requesting access to background location, Google Play requires a strict(er) set of requirements to be able to use background permissions for apps installed via the Google Play store. It provides a set of guidelines which have to be fulfilled to allow an app to enter- or remain in the store with said permissions.
In short you have to follow the steps given below at Google support to verify your apps location permission requirement.
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9214102?hl=en#zippy=
I'm developing new features for this open source application, but i don't know how to create the APK for where i upload it to the store. does anyone have any idea on how to do this? i'm new to all of this so i appreciate the help.
this is the link for the source code https://github.com/guh/berrylan
I already tried looking on the documentation of Qml to see which one they used to developed this app
If it is an open source application, you probably don't want to be uploading it to the store yourself, especially if you haven't discussed the process with the project leads.
there can be only one application with the same package name / Application id for most app stores
if you change the package name / application id it is incredibly confusing for users to know which app to use
this means most App stores will block the app as a "copycat"
even if the project is open source, if you want to replace the original app in the app store you need the signing key. Putting this signing key is a huge security mistake. If you did this then malware authors could compile a version of the app with "new features" that hurt the user or cost them money, getting the app banned. As a result most open source project don't keep the key in the project, and you'd need to contact the original uploader
even if you had the key, For Google you'd need access to the Play store developer accounts. Which would mean having your gmail address added as trusted for the account owner. Which means you'd need to contact the project owner
In summary, even if an app is open source, publishing to a store is a big step which needs contact with the project owners if you don't want to get you or the app banned.
We're developing a new SharePoint 2013 site and we want our users to be able to easily save files to SharePoint. We have about 100 site collections and each represents a Property that we own and contains all the documents related to that Property. Obviously, the easiest way to ensure a new document is created in the correct location is to first navigate to the document library, then click "New Document". Unfortunately, we anticipate most users will create the document first, then want to choose where to save it. Our users are not so computer savvy and are accustomed to file shares.
I've tried using "Connect To Office" but have had mixed results. Ideally, I would like this link to be to the site collection root so the user can see all the document libraries on the site rather than a single document library.
Any tips on using "Connect To Office"? What permissions or GPOs need to be set up so this works smoothly? We have an SSL site and our users are running Win 7,8 & 10 and also use Office 2010 & 2013.
Is there any way to hide the system/admin folders at the root level of the site collection in Explorer View? The site collections are publishing sites, so there are many additional folders and it's difficult to see which are relevant to the users - plus I'd like to hide them to help with security. There are approximately 25 folders that they should not see.
TIA
I have the exact same scenario.
I have had quite good success mapping the root SP site as a mapped drive. Users can easily browse the SP site libraries as they would folders on the network. It was a bit tricky to get it reliable but now is working very well.
Would also like to know the answer to hiding all the publishing system libraries. I tried setting them to hidden in SP Designer without success.
Mike