Why can't FireFox cache just save image data directly without encoding it so it can't be viewed directly?

For secure web pages, not a problem can understand why it does that.

But, when it comes to pages that are not securely encrypted, why does 
FireFox have to encode the cache files in a format Windows doesn't 
understand?

Retrieving graphical objects from a cache would be a lot easier if I could 
just browse them visually.  Regarding graphics on a page, if FireFox gets an 
updated version of an image file, does it automatically discard the old 
image file, or does it hold onto it?

Cheers ...

Geoffrey Hyde



0
Geoffrey
12/13/2009 11:35:05 AM
mozilla.support.firefox 24319 articles. 10 followers. Post Follow

14 Replies
1100 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 14

On 13.12.2009 05:35, Geoffrey Hyde wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> For secure web pages, not a problem can understand why it does that.
>
> But, when it comes to pages that are not securely encrypted, why does
> FireFox have to encode the cache files in a format Windows doesn't
> understand?
>
> Retrieving graphical objects from a cache would be a lot easier if I could
> just browse them visually.  Regarding graphics on a page, if FireFox gets an
> updated version of an image file, does it automatically discard the old
> image file, or does it hold onto it?
>
> Cheers ...
>
> Geoffrey Hyde
>
>
>

I find it a lot easier, FWIW, when I am on page is to do "View Page 
Info" and then click on the "Media" tab.



-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
12/13/2009 1:00:25 PM
"Jay Garcia" wrote...
> On 13.12.2009 05:35, Geoffrey Hyde wrote:
>> [...] why does FireFox have to encode the cache files in a format 
>> Windows doesn't  understand?
>>
>> Retrieving graphical objects from a cache would be a lot easier if I could
>> just browse them visually.  Regarding graphics on a page, if FireFox gets an
>> updated version of an image file, does it automatically discard the old
>> image file, or does it hold onto it?   //  Geoffrey Hyde
> 
> I find it a lot easier, FWIW, when I am on page is to do "View Page 
> Info" and then click on the "Media" tab.    // Jay Garcia

I like "Cache Viewer" (28KB download),  about the only planning  I might
do ahead of time is to clear cache.   You will see the actual urlnames.
    Tools->Options->Advanced->Network -> clear cache
to invoke:   Tools --> CacheViewer  (Ctrl+Shift+C )

CacheViewer  -- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489

Usage tip: sort on key (url),  or time via column headings.
Select an item to view the image,  then use the down arrow key to
view the next image,  very fast because it is all in cache.

 -- 
HTH,
David McRitchie,   extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
Firefox Custom:  http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
 

 
0
David
12/13/2009 3:29:20 PM
In message <FridnRCpjILmTLnWnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@mozilla.org> "Geoffrey
Hyde" <g.hyde@bigNOSPAMpond.net.au> was claimed to have wrote:

>For secure web pages, not a problem can understand why it does that.
>
>But, when it comes to pages that are not securely encrypted, why does 
>FireFox have to encode the cache files in a format Windows doesn't 
>understand?

Browser caches are one of those cross-over areas where untrusted content
is stored in a location that defaults to a higher trust level, so
special precautions need to be taken to avoid untrusted content from
being treated as local or otherwise executed.

This feature mitigates one step in a potential exploit scenario.

For example, say a vulnerability is discovered that allows an attacker
to execute a shell command.  It may not be a FF vulnerability, it's more
likely to be in another component (Flash, Adobe Reader, etc) that can be
launched by an attacker via a website since other programs will have
their own security models and other programs will treat anything on disk
as "local" whereas Firefox knows the cache is untrusted internet-sourced
content.

Having an attacker able to execute shell commands is bad, but combining
it with the ability of the aforementioned attacker to place files in a
known location on disk named in a way that the OS will know how to open
them using a default file handler / file association?  That's much
worse.  Using randomized names without valid extensions prevents a .CMD
file from being executed in this type of attack.
0
Dave
12/15/2009 5:21:47 PM
On 2009/12/15 10:21, Dave Warren wrote:
> In message<FridnRCpjILmTLnWnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@mozilla.org>  "Geoffrey
> Hyde"<g.hyde@bigNOSPAMpond.net.au>  was claimed to have wrote:
>
>> For secure web pages, not a problem can understand why it does that.
>>
>> But, when it comes to pages that are not securely encrypted, why does
>> FireFox have to encode the cache files in a format Windows doesn't
>> understand?
>
> Browser caches are one of those cross-over areas where untrusted content
> is stored in a location that defaults to a higher trust level, so
> special precautions need to be taken to avoid untrusted content from
> being treated as local or otherwise executed.
>
> This feature mitigates one step in a potential exploit scenario.
>
> For example, say a vulnerability is discovered that allows an attacker
> to execute a shell command.  It may not be a FF vulnerability, it's more
> likely to be in another component (Flash, Adobe Reader, etc) that can be
> launched by an attacker via a website since other programs will have
> their own security models and other programs will treat anything on disk
> as "local" whereas Firefox knows the cache is untrusted internet-sourced
> content.
>
> Having an attacker able to execute shell commands is bad, but combining
> it with the ability of the aforementioned attacker to place files in a
> known location on disk named in a way that the OS will know how to open
> them using a default file handler / file association?  That's much
> worse.  Using randomized names without valid extensions prevents a .CMD
> file from being executed in this type of attack.

You can view information about items in the cache with the built-in 
cache viewer in Firefox.  You type about:cache into the address bar and 
hit the Enter key, then choose disk cache.  If you want to view or 
download the images, look in Page Info in the Media area.
0
EE
12/15/2009 7:44:36 PM
"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message 
news:05ffi5lqh06kab4sr47ic8ivnvt52l2hai@4ax.com...
> Browser caches are one of those cross-over areas where untrusted content
> is stored in a location that defaults to a higher trust level, so
> special precautions need to be taken to avoid untrusted content from
> being treated as local or otherwise executed.

How does it comprise a security risk if FireFox stores a .jpg file as a .jpg 
file with a .jpg extension?

> This feature mitigates one step in a potential exploit scenario.
>
> For example, say a vulnerability is discovered that allows an attacker
> to execute a shell command.  It may not be a FF vulnerability, it's more
> likely to be in another component (Flash, Adobe Reader, etc) that can be
> launched by an attacker via a website since other programs will have
> their own security models and other programs will treat anything on disk
> as "local" whereas Firefox knows the cache is untrusted internet-sourced
> content.

If it's a shell command it should just straight out get blocked, period.

> Having an attacker able to execute shell commands is bad, but combining
> it with the ability of the aforementioned attacker to place files in a
> known location on disk named in a way that the OS will know how to open
> them using a default file handler / file association?  That's much
> worse.  Using randomized names without valid extensions prevents a .CMD
> file from being executed in this type of attack.

Wouldn't it be better for FireFox to just automatically kill known dangerous 
file type extensions?  Also, wouldn't it be better if FireFox automatically 
treated anything from the internet as being subject to heavily restricted 
permissions anyway?  Windows uses default permissions a lot, but FireFox 
does not have to follow the Windows model since it's already full of holes.

What I am asking is that when FireFox recognizes known file types that are 
compliant with their relevant filetype specification, that they just be 
saved as the file type they are.  If there is anything suspicious about the 
contents of a file type that FireFox gets asked to download, then FireFox 
should at the very least ask me what I want to do and ask me if I trust the 
site sending the suspicious file type.


Cheers ...

Geoffrey Hyde



0
Geoffrey
12/15/2009 10:14:02 PM
In message <e5SdnWtLo_bfl7XWnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@mozilla.org> "Geoffrey
Hyde" <g.hyde@bigNOSPAMpond.net.au> was claimed to have wrote:

>"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message 
>news:05ffi5lqh06kab4sr47ic8ivnvt52l2hai@4ax.com...
>> This feature mitigates one step in a potential exploit scenario.
>>
>> For example, say a vulnerability is discovered that allows an attacker
>> to execute a shell command.  It may not be a FF vulnerability, it's more
>> likely to be in another component (Flash, Adobe Reader, etc) that can be
>> launched by an attacker via a website since other programs will have
>> their own security models and other programs will treat anything on disk
>> as "local" whereas Firefox knows the cache is untrusted internet-sourced
>> content.
>
>If it's a shell command it should just straight out get blocked, period.

Yes it should.  If an app does expose shell commands in some form, it's
probably called a security vulnerability and they shouldn't exist.
Unfortunately, with most humans being less than perfect, vulnerabilities
do exist.

There have been a few of these types of cases as of late, usually
relying on launching one URL type from another app.

Hence, we have a concept called mitigation.  Rather than relying on
"attacker shouldn't be able to launch shell commands" we also say "but
if they do, lets limit what they can do" and "lets limit what files
we'll allow them to place on the drive" and various other mitigation.

>> Having an attacker able to execute shell commands is bad, but combining
>> it with the ability of the aforementioned attacker to place files in a
>> known location on disk named in a way that the OS will know how to open
>> them using a default file handler / file association?  That's much
>> worse.  Using randomized names without valid extensions prevents a .CMD
>> file from being executed in this type of attack.
>
>Wouldn't it be better for FireFox to just automatically kill known dangerous 
>file type extensions?  Also, wouldn't it be better if FireFox automatically 
>treated anything from the internet as being subject to heavily restricted 
>permissions anyway?  Windows uses default permissions a lot, but FireFox 
>does not have to follow the Windows model since it's already full of holes.

What's dangerous?  Say a vulnerability is discovered in some popular JPG
library (I know, I know... Couldn't happen) and all an attacker needs
the victim to do is save a JPG to disk and double-click.  If Firefox
doesn't use that library it may not be vulnerable on it's own, but if
Firefox allows a website to place a file in a predictable location on
disk, then all an attacker needs is some way to tell Windows to launch
that JPG.

This vulnerability may not be in Firefox itself, it might be a
vulnerability in iTunes, but exploiting it might need the name of a file
that exists on disk and can be manipulated into containing malicious
code.

Being able to save arbitrary files in predictable locations with
predictable (or known) names isn't a security vulnerability itself, but
it sure makes exploiting other vulnerabilities easier, and it's a
relatively simple mitigation to implement with few negative side
effects.
0
Dave
12/15/2009 11:22:40 PM
Hi Geoffrey,
This thread seems to be continuing past your problem of not being
able to view pictures in your cache.  did the CacheViewer extension
and usage tips previously mentioned  solve your original problem or not.
 
  CacheViewer  -- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489 
0
David
12/15/2009 11:41:44 PM
In message <h6ydnXEi19UDqLXWnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@mozilla.org> "David
McRitchie" <firefox01@verizon.net> was claimed to have wrote:

>This thread seems to be continuing past your problem of not being
>able to view pictures in your cache.

It seems on topic to me, given that everything discussed so far directly
answers the subject or body of the original question.
0
Dave
12/16/2009 2:01:21 AM
and you removed the question that I asked Geoffrey.
Incidentally "Cache Viewer" doesn't work in my main profile in 3.5.6, does work
in another profile.  Expect there may be a extension conflict.
  
0
David
12/16/2009 3:51:05 AM
"David McRitchie" <firefox01@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:h6ydnXEi19UDqLXWnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@mozilla.org...
> Hi Geoffrey,
> This thread seems to be continuing past your problem of not being
> able to view pictures in your cache.  did the CacheViewer extension
> and usage tips previously mentioned  solve your original problem or not.
>
>  CacheViewer  -- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489

I looked at cache viewer, but it's not quite what I'm after, and I also do 
not understand why I need an extension just to see files in my cache.  I 
also found that there is the about:cache URL which FireFox recognizes.

Unfortunately, FireFox does not view objects in the cache which are images 
as images and this is my main problem.

If I need to hunt down a particular image, and it's still in the cache but 
the webpage history referring to it has expired, deleted, or been 
invalidated, it makes it very difficult to see images in my cache when I am 
looking for them.  It's even harder if they're encrypted files.

At the present time, my need for viewing images in cache is not urgent, so 
please consider this thread closed if there is no further useful information 
to disclose.


Cheers ...

Geoffrey Hyde


0
Geoffrey
12/16/2009 7:08:10 AM
"Geoffrey Hyde" wrote
> "David McRitchie" wrote...
>> did the CacheViewer extension  and usage tips previously mentioned  
>> solve your original problem or not.
> 
> I looked at cache viewer, but it's not quite what I'm after, and I also do 
> not understand why I need an extension just to see files in my cache.  I 
> also found that there is the about:cache URL which FireFox recognizes.
> 
> Unfortunately, FireFox does not view objects in the cache which are images 
> as images and this is my main problem.
> 
> If I need to hunt down a particular image, and it's still in the cache but 
> the webpage history referring to it has expired, deleted, or been 
> invalidated, it makes it very difficult to see images in my cache when I am 
> looking for them.  It's even harder if they're encrypted files.   //  Geoffrey Hyde

Now at least we are getting some interaction from you.  Cache Viewer
supplies all that you asked for except for the why about:cache and   the directory
has to show the internal names in Firefox -- and I'd say what difference does it make as long 
as you find what you need.   Basically you are not going to reproduce the
directory structure of the web on your computer.  

The WHY you need an extension is because
Firefox tries to keep a small footprint for people that don't need extra features.
Think iPod and personal hand held devices.   The concept 
is modular programming so parts can be easily maintained.
But more  to the point the extensions, as a rule, are written by people who
have nothing to do with the Firefox code and want to change / modify /
or see additional information.  That what Firefox is user customization.

Perhaps you need to include why or what you want.   I just assume you want
to be able to view the image,  find the article it appeared in, or copy the image.

Kind of expect you to look at my web page for more information if not on the
actual extension page.  The author does not supply usage information on his page
(his home page is not in English) so I've added a bit  more additional information
to my page.   You should be familiar with working with columns such as
adding columns, removing columns, resizing width of columns, sorting on columns
from directory entries and from Library List for bookmarks and history,  but I'll try to be more
explicit.  Here is most of what I have for the description on my own webpage (firefox.htm).

If I said it wasn't working in my main profile, sorry  about that, forgot that it does
not show local files.   I clear my cache on exiting Firefox.   If you want to keep
cached files longer, don't clear cache.  Expiration only affects whether Firefox
has to refresh its cache copy, AFAIK nothing to do with removing from cache.

As seen on my page:   http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm

"Cache Viewer" extension  (28KB download),  author: benki ===
  https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489

GUI Front-end to listcache entries of "about:cache" [ref].  Allows searching on 
parts of the urlnames(key column) with one or more strings in any 
order (i.e. ".org /icons/ .gif") and sorting on any of the columns.  i.e. filter on JPG 
then sort on time, use down arrow to browse through the files.  You can see additional 
columns by clicking on little icon to right of rightmost column header.  The key 
column is the urlname, the selectable columns are:  
      *mime type, 
      *size, 
      *Device, 
      *Last Fetched, 
        Last Modified, 
        Expiration Time, 
        Fetch Count.  
    *    denotes default columns as in Restore columns
You can rearrange columns.  Display rows have a context menu (right click menu)
to browse, save, or  delete.  

You can double-click on a  row to view the file.  

You will not see local files in Cache Viewer.  [Tools]
(it is invoked from the Tools Menu]

-- 
HTH,
David McRitchie,   extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
Firefox Custom:  http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
  
0
David
12/16/2009 11:47:58 AM
I don't mean to be rude by top-posting, but your lack of contextualization 
by not inserting your reply into what I'm saying (IE inlining) is giving me 
problems trying to figure out what you're responding to is just as bad. 
Could you please repost a properly contextualized response?

Cheers ...

Geoffrey Hyde


"David McRitchie" <firefox01@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:LqadnQ7FWNziVLXWnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@mozilla.org...
> "Geoffrey Hyde" wrote
>> "David McRitchie" wrote...
>>> did the CacheViewer extension  and usage tips previously mentioned 
>>> solve your original problem or not.
>>
>> I looked at cache viewer, but it's not quite what I'm after, and I also 
>> do not understand why I need an extension just to see files in my cache. 
>> I also found that there is the about:cache URL which FireFox recognizes.
>>
>> Unfortunately, FireFox does not view objects in the cache which are 
>> images as images and this is my main problem.
>>
>> If I need to hunt down a particular image, and it's still in the cache 
>> but the webpage history referring to it has expired, deleted, or been 
>> invalidated, it makes it very difficult to see images in my cache when I 
>> am looking for them.  It's even harder if they're encrypted files.   // 
>> Geoffrey Hyde
>
> Now at least we are getting some interaction from you.  Cache Viewer
> supplies all that you asked for except for the why about:cache and   the 
> directory
> has to show the internal names in Firefox -- and I'd say what difference 
> does it make as long as you find what you need.   Basically you are not 
> going to reproduce the
> directory structure of the web on your computer.
> The WHY you need an extension is because
> Firefox tries to keep a small footprint for people that don't need extra 
> features.
> Think iPod and personal hand held devices.   The concept is modular 
> programming so parts can be easily maintained.
> But more  to the point the extensions, as a rule, are written by people 
> who
> have nothing to do with the Firefox code and want to change / modify /
> or see additional information.  That what Firefox is user customization.
>
> Perhaps you need to include why or what you want.   I just assume you want
> to be able to view the image,  find the article it appeared in, or copy 
> the image.
>
> Kind of expect you to look at my web page for more information if not on 
> the
> actual extension page.  The author does not supply usage information on 
> his page
> (his home page is not in English) so I've added a bit  more additional 
> information
> to my page.   You should be familiar with working with columns such as
> adding columns, removing columns, resizing width of columns, sorting on 
> columns
> from directory entries and from Library List for bookmarks and history, 
> but I'll try to be more
> explicit.  Here is most of what I have for the description on my own 
> webpage (firefox.htm).
>
> If I said it wasn't working in my main profile, sorry  about that, forgot 
> that it does
> not show local files.   I clear my cache on exiting Firefox.   If you want 
> to keep
> cached files longer, don't clear cache.  Expiration only affects whether 
> Firefox
> has to refresh its cache copy, AFAIK nothing to do with removing from 
> cache.
>
> As seen on my page:   http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
>
> "Cache Viewer" extension  (28KB download),  author: benki ===
>  https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489
>
> GUI Front-end to listcache entries of "about:cache" [ref].  Allows 
> searching on parts of the urlnames(key column) with one or more strings in 
> any order (i.e. ".org /icons/ .gif") and sorting on any of the columns. 
> i.e. filter on JPG then sort on time, use down arrow to browse through the 
> files.  You can see additional columns by clicking on little icon to right 
> of rightmost column header.  The key column is the urlname, the selectable 
> columns are:  *mime type, *size, *Device, *Last Fetched, Last Modified, 
> Expiration Time, Fetch Count.  *    denotes default columns as in Restore 
> columns
> You can rearrange columns.  Display rows have a context menu (right click 
> menu)
> to browse, save, or  delete.
> You can double-click on a  row to view the file.
> You will not see local files in Cache Viewer.  [Tools]
> (it is invoked from the Tools Menu]
>
> -- 
> HTH,
> David McRitchie,   extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
> Firefox Custom:  http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
> 


0
Geoffrey
12/17/2009 1:15:10 AM
On 2009-12-16 18:15, Geoffrey Hyde wrote:
> I don't mean to be rude by top-posting, but your lack of contextualization
> by not inserting your reply into what I'm saying (IE inlining) is giving me
> problems trying to figure out what you're responding to is just as bad.
> Could you please repost a properly contextualized response?
>
> Cheers ...
>
> Geoffrey Hyde
>
>
> "David McRitchie"<firefox01@verizon.net>  wrote in message
> news:LqadnQ7FWNziVLXWnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@mozilla.org...
>> "Geoffrey Hyde" wrote
>>> "David McRitchie" wrote...
>>>> did the CacheViewer extension  and usage tips previously mentioned
>>>> solve your original problem or not.
>>>
>>> I looked at cache viewer, but it's not quite what I'm after, and I also
>>> do not understand why I need an extension just to see files in my cache.
>>> I also found that there is the about:cache URL which FireFox recognizes.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, FireFox does not view objects in the cache which are
>>> images as images and this is my main problem.
>>>
>>> If I need to hunt down a particular image, and it's still in the cache
>>> but the webpage history referring to it has expired, deleted, or been
>>> invalidated, it makes it very difficult to see images in my cache when I
>>> am looking for them.  It's even harder if they're encrypted files.   //
>>> Geoffrey Hyde
>>
>> Now at least we are getting some interaction from you.  Cache Viewer
>> supplies all that you asked for except for the why about:cache and   the
>> directory
>> has to show the internal names in Firefox -- and I'd say what difference
>> does it make as long as you find what you need.   Basically you are not
>> going to reproduce the
>> directory structure of the web on your computer.
>> The WHY you need an extension is because
>> Firefox tries to keep a small footprint for people that don't need extra
>> features.
>> Think iPod and personal hand held devices.   The concept is modular
>> programming so parts can be easily maintained.
>> But more  to the point the extensions, as a rule, are written by people
>> who
>> have nothing to do with the Firefox code and want to change / modify /
>> or see additional information.  That what Firefox is user customization.
>>
>> Perhaps you need to include why or what you want.   I just assume you want
>> to be able to view the image,  find the article it appeared in, or copy
>> the image.
>>
>> Kind of expect you to look at my web page for more information if not on
>> the
>> actual extension page.  The author does not supply usage information on
>> his page
>> (his home page is not in English) so I've added a bit  more additional
>> information
>> to my page.   You should be familiar with working with columns such as
>> adding columns, removing columns, resizing width of columns, sorting on
>> columns
>> from directory entries and from Library List for bookmarks and history,
>> but I'll try to be more
>> explicit.  Here is most of what I have for the description on my own
>> webpage (firefox.htm).
>>
>> If I said it wasn't working in my main profile, sorry  about that, forgot
>> that it does
>> not show local files.   I clear my cache on exiting Firefox.   If you want
>> to keep
>> cached files longer, don't clear cache.  Expiration only affects whether
>> Firefox
>> has to refresh its cache copy, AFAIK nothing to do with removing from
>> cache.
>>
>> As seen on my page:   http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
>>
>> "Cache Viewer" extension  (28KB download),  author: benki ===
>>   https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489
>>
>> GUI Front-end to listcache entries of "about:cache" [ref].  Allows
>> searching on parts of the urlnames(key column) with one or more strings in
>> any order (i.e. ".org /icons/ .gif") and sorting on any of the columns.
>> i.e. filter on JPG then sort on time, use down arrow to browse through the
>> files.  You can see additional columns by clicking on little icon to right
>> of rightmost column header.  The key column is the urlname, the selectable
>> columns are:  *mime type, *size, *Device, *Last Fetched, Last Modified,
>> Expiration Time, Fetch Count.  *    denotes default columns as in Restore
>> columns
>> You can rearrange columns.  Display rows have a context menu (right click
>> menu)
>> to browse, save, or  delete.
>> You can double-click on a  row to view the file.
>> You will not see local files in Cache Viewer.  [Tools]
>> (it is invoked from the Tools Menu]
>>
>> --
>> HTH,
>> David McRitchie,   extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
>> Firefox Custom:  http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
>>
>
>
You can see the images on the current page directly using the Media tab 
on Page Info.
0
EE
12/18/2009 6:18:14 PM
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:08:10 +1000, in message <mJWdnUJUmq_yGrXWnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@mozilla.org> 
"Geoffrey Hyde" <g.hyde@bigNOSPAMpond.net.au> wrote:

> Unfortunately, FireFox does not view objects in the cache which are images 
> as images and this is my main problem.


Firefox's built-in cache viewer does view objects in the cache which are images, as images.


1.  Put Firefox into *offline* mode

        File � Work offline

    You will need this for step 4 below.


2.  Open Firefox's built-in cache viewer by entering the URL
        about:cache
    then click on the link "List cache entries"

    You will now see a list of URLs in the cache.


3.  Click any one of the URLs to view the more detailed Cache Entry Information 
    for this cache entry.

    FWIW I prefer to use   
            (right-click) � Open in New Tab
    because that way it is quicker to go back to the cache listing.


4.  Click on the link next to "key:" at the top of the detailed page.

    If you are in off-line mode (see step 1), then Firefox will view 
    the object in the cache.  

    If the object is an image, Firefox will view the image as an image.



> [...] they're encrypted files.


A.  "files"

    Some of the objects in Firefox's cache do not even have files of their own.  
    Only large objects get files of their own.  Small objects do not get files 
    of their own; instead they are embedded inside one of the cache files 
    _CACHE_001_, _CACHE_002_, _CACHE_003_.  

    On the Cache Entry Information page (step 3 above), if it says 
        file on disk: none
    then you know the object does not have a file of its own.

    I would guess that this saves disk space.  For small objects, the overheads
    of rounding up to the cluster size would be large.


B.  "encrypted files"

    To be accurate, they are not encrypted *files* -- the are encrypted *filenames*.
    (And of course, this only applies when the object gets a cache file of its own.)


-- 
Regards
Ralph
0
Ralph
12/20/2009 10:18:27 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

I can't get no cache, I can't get no cache. 'Cause I try and I try and I try and, I can't get no, I can't get no cache.
I have fiddled out for days tinkering with the setting in about:config trying to get FireFox 12 to use the disk cache. I have NOT found the trick. This One Trick Pony ain't doing it like it used to up until recently. Pray tell anyone, What information can I share that will point a knowledgeable person to aid me in getting FF to disk.cache? I have also tried restarting FF with add-ons disabled, (There were NOT too many to do this to, so it was quick and easy) Here is my stab at trying to convey the information that MIGHT govern matters Using about:cache Informatio...

Re: I can't get no cache, I can't get no cache. ' Cause I try and I try and I try and, I can't get no, I can't get no cache.
<div>please com e see me about htis<br /> <br /> ------- Original Message f= rom the Global Relay Archive -------<br /> From: Hp &lt;ferd@farkel.net&gt;= <br /> To: "support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org" &lt;support-firefox@lists.mo= zilla.org&gt;<br /> Sent: Sun, 27 May 2012 18:30:18 -0700<br /> Subject: I = can't get no cache, I can't get no cache. 'Cause I try and I try and I try = and, I can't get no, I can't get no cache.<br /> <br /></div> <pre class=3D"gr-maex-body-pre&qu...

can't get any support and can't open firefox
Name: Jacquelyn Flora Email: jacquelynfloraatmacdotcom Product: Firefox Summary: can't get any support and can't open firefox Comments: I am so completely frustrated since I have been trying to resolve this issue for weeks. I cannot open firefox at all ever since I upgraded (big mistake) to 3.0.5 and then 3.0.6. Your support site isn't worth anything because it doesn't answer any of the questions. I am so frustrated that I am ready to give up. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_4_11; en) AppleWebKit/525.27.1 (KHTML, like...

2010: Can't register - can't download the software - can't register until I have the software
I have active maintenance on Rad Studio: From: Vicky Rassmisaengthong [mailto:Vicky.Rassmisaengthong@EMBARCADERO.COM] Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:58 PM To: rgrossman Cc: amer.supportadmin@codegear.com; Ashley Cosentino Subject: Software Assurance Support for Tech III Inc PO# Credit Card Dear Embarcadero Technologies Support Customer, Welcome! You have been registered as the primary contact on support account number AM####### Herewith we confirm your Embarcadero Technologies support agreement covering: Qty 1 RAD Studio Enterprise Named User licens...

Firefox can't open from URL on other App, can't shut down.
Until now, I had been using Firefox v1.0.2. Beginning yesterday, it became impossible to open a browser by clicking on a URL in either Polarbar Mailer or Pronews/2. There was one exception to this, at a time when there was no open Firefox window at all, when clicking on a URL did open a browser; that never happened if a Firefox window was already open. Shutting down Firefox in the usual way is now also impossible, unless it is done before much activity has taken place in the browser (only after a period of activity in the browser do these symptoms occur). It is possible to ...

Firefox doesn't open; can't get support in Explorer
Name: ken reid Email: kreidatfdainfodotcom Product: Firefox Summary: Firefox doesn't open; can't get support in Explorer Comments: Hi I have been using Thunderbird and Firefox for at least seven years. I do not like Outlook or Internet Explorer. However, I had to sync my PDA phone today with Outlook and now I can't open Firefox at all. I get an error that says: <window ID="main window" V I have uninstalled and reinstalled the program three times, but it wont open. Thunderbird is fine and the box for Outlook and Internet explorer bei...

Can't save and/or can't read mail
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060900090409060907050501 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I created a few new accounts in SM to read administrative addresses. When I went back to read my main mailbox I got a message something like "can't save mail, do you have permissions" and yes, I do. I note that the permissions in various accounts are not all the same, some directories are 755, some are 700. Same for Mail files. In any case I have permissions, so what is this really saying. (...

Can't sign into Ebay, Getting Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled
Name: Barb Email: emailgrataoldotcom Product: eBay Companion Summary: Can't sign into Ebay, Getting Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled Comments: Hi, I have Mozilla Firefox. (I can't remember what version). When I go to sign in to Ebay, I get a message that says Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled. How can I correct this problem so I can again sign into my Ebay account and sell on Ebay? I am not a super-technical person, but if someone coul...

Can't sign into Ebay, Getting Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled #2
Name: Barb Email: emailgrataoldotcom Product: eBay Companion Summary: Can't sign into Ebay, Getting Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled Comments: Hi, I have Mozilla Firefox. (I can't remember what version). When I go to sign in to Ebay, I get a message that says Firefox can't connect securely to signin.ebay.com because the SSL protocol has been disabled. How can I correct this problem so I can again sign into my Ebay account and sell on Ebay? I am not a super-technical person, but if someone coul...

Two things,Why do I keep getting emails that I don't want. can't get rid of them? Why can't I get my email when I am out of town? Or can I?
Name: Ed Leech Email: ELCraftatzoominternetdotnet Product: Thunderbird Summary: Two things,Why do I keep getting emails that I don't want. can't get rid of them? Why can't I get my email when I am out of town? Or can I? Comments: I am getting frusted with all the emails coming in that I do not want, I am using the tools to get thme out but they keep coming. They just use different names or whatever. I have been thinking of just switching to something else but my business intrusts know this email and it is tooo confusing to change. Every time I go out of town on bu...

I'm very upset to say i can't use firefox, it doesn't work anymore...
Name: Stephen Email: retrodotrevivalathotmaildotcom Product: Firefox Summary: I'm very upset to say i can't use firefox, it doesn't work anymore... Comments: I'm very upset to say i can't use firefox, it doesn't work anymore... the addons menu is blank with all weird buttons on the button, and all my addons i cant get to but some still are there like my google toolbar but it won't show in addons, and some buttons are in the navagation toolbar. i will have to uninstall if you can't help Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5....

why I won't (can't) use firefox 3
Name: Christopher Olinde Email: agricolaeatverizondotnet Product: Firefox Summary: why I won't (can't) use firefox 3 Comments: I'm running windows vista on an HP desktop. I keep getting suggestions to upgrade to firefox 3. I tried, and it was a great mistake. It conflicted with my AVG program (I think) and I could not even uninstall either program. I was almost forced into a Recovery. Also, it will not work properly with Microsoft media player--I don't really like anything having to do with Bill Gates, but some of these programs are necessary to acces...

Windows ICF: Can't Live With it, Can't Live Without it
an article by David Wong - last updated August 22, 2002=20 "Windows ICF (Internet Connection Firewall) is the built-in firewall in=20 Windows XP, both the Home and Professional editions. ICF is an=20 excellent personal firewall and will prevent most attacks from the=20 Internet. However, the lack of granular control makes ICF much too=20 restrictive for power users. So, as they say, you can't live with it, = you=20 can't live without it. For this article, we put ICF into the lab and set = our=20 hackers (well, security penetration testers) loose at it to see how good = ...

Can't base report on stored procedure--'Can't create Datawindow'
I installed IM65 today to give it a try. I made a db config to our local ASE 11.9.2 engine via Sybase' odbc driver that came with 11.9.2. I start a new report, tell it to be tabular and to get data from a SP. It asks which SP and I tell it. The result is an odbc error: Cannot create DataWindow Intersolv SQL ODBC driver: Incorrect syntax near '='. 1 execute dbo.sp_si_addressbest_;0 RETURN_VALUE = :RETURN_VALUE' I can execute the SP fine from SQL Advantage or from Crytal Reports. Thanks. -- Frank Burleigh Indiana University School of Law Bloomi...

Web resources about - Why can't FireFox cache just save image data directly without encoding it so it can't be viewed directly? - mozilla.support.firefox

Resources last updated: 1/2/2016 10:04:06 PM