Couple of times now I went to use Copy Url on the right click menu only to see it grayed out.

I really can't think of a situation where this option should not be available.

---

um while on the subject, most times the next step is to paste the url to the address bar. any chance of adding a "send to browser" option to the menu?

[scr4ve]

Hey BearCan,

you can directly open the url in the browser by selecting "Open in browser".
Furthermore, the "copy url" feature might be disabled because you added a DLC Container. In order to protect the links, viewing them is not possible.

Regards,

scr4ve

Doh!

and What does wanting to copy the url have to do with protecting the DLC?
It's not like the copy is going to change the DLC. I'm still able to delete that item
from the link list.

[pspzockerscene]

No this is about protecting the links.
If someone grabs them this person can abuse them so they're offline.
DLC is a protection against that (no, not 100% safe but better than nothing).

GreeZ pspzockerscene

What was the original purpose for DLC?
hiding links in JD still doesn't hide them with a sniffer. If someone gave me a DLC
I assure you I can get the URL if I wanted. the system doesn't make sense.

I'm using it to keep my link list short (I had 20k+. now I keep 6k-)
so JD doesn't take up so much memory and resort to swap file.

If I can't copy the URL I'm going back to notepad holding my links.
shit happens, like a bad download, or I forgot to copy the picture for my catalog or the link died and I want to find a new compatible link to finish the DL. using the old link with google finds them far better then a name search.

the other thing is I created the DLC so why isn't my own creation full accessable?

[tony2long]

Originally Posted by BearCan

I assure you I can get the URL if I wanted.

The other thing is I created the DLC so why isn't my own creation full accessable?

I thought you wanted to copy URLs...

Learn before use. Notepad is the correct choice for your need.

I prefer Notepad++.

Keeping lots of links in jD's Download queue is not a good idea, because links can expire. It forces you to validate all the links contained in download sets before one of them starts downloading.

[pspzockerscene]

Originally Posted by BearCan

What was the original purpose for DLC?
hiding links in JD still doesn't hide them with a sniffer.

Yes we know that but it isn't that easy for everyone to use a sniffer
...also note that when you insert links that need to be decrypted like links from linkprotectors and linksave or so, you also can't see the real urls in jd.
I'am sorry but if you wanna get those links you will have to use a sniffer or just accept that you won't be able to see them in jd!

GreeZ psp

[buggsy]

I totally agree with BearCan. So i explain my experiments with jdownloader

I often need to save MY list of links so i do dlc too.

1) More and more links are hidden nowadays, (because of bots etc) so when i just copy / paste a link on google, google does not find back the original page.
If all links are not copyable i dont remember the exact way about how i get these links firstly (sometimes it can take long time to find what you are looking for just because it's rare )

2) Dlc container does not handle comments ?! Dont you thinks that sucks ?... I dont know for you but i often put really important information in there...
for example the origin of the links... which can be very usefull when we have the surprize that the compressed archive needs a fu*** password (yeah ... you feel my frustration experiment here .. i know)!

So dlc could be better


So when i create a dlc with the links i found, and send the dlc to another computer (with another ip of course ) i would like jdownloader save comment and does not make links not copyable.
That would be easier than copy link manually, then copy comments etc ..

But in another hand you are right , it's a good idea to hide link from bots etc.

So why not simply make two entry in the contextual menu ?
- create dlc with protection (used by default)
- create dlc with no protection (links are still copyable)

Everyone would be happy

[drbits]

DLC files are not intended as backups for your link list. There is a different format (JDC) for that. To backup your link list. Click on File, Save, Save Linklist.

DLCs are intended for uploaders who want to keep the location of files secret, while allowing people to download them. There is no reason for comments. You use an INF or DIZ file for that.

DLCs use a difficult to break double encryption scheme (one part is on a jdownloader.org server). The passwords and format change occasionally, so old DLC files become obsolete.

JDCs allow you to provide your own password and they don't expire. They also do not keep enough information. They do not keep track of which links have been downloaded, which links have errors, and so on.

I have proposed an additional format in the Bug Tracker that would allow you to store all of your information in an XML file and optionally encrypt the file. Links from a DLC would still be encrypted, but the links from the XML file would not. This would be a way to store the Links related part of the database separate from the settings.

@BearCan:
Using URLs that do not include the file name, encoding the URLs in the DLC, and saving the files encrypted RAR archives is the best privacy protection available for posted files. A network sniffer (like WireShark) might allow you to find the files, but would not tell you what they are. The only way to break the privacy is if somebody posts a description of the files with the DLC. Then, a spyder bot (like HTTrack) can search web sites, find key words in the description and associate it with the DLC. The solution to that is to require a password and ID to search the web site (including for bots).

Of course, you can just distribute a virus on music CDs and search people's computers for files with names that contain key words. You could even get sophisticated enough to have the virus hide itself from the file system, so an antivirus could not find it. Sony did exactly that. That kind of virus is now called a Rootkit. Sony had to pay a lot of money in that lawsuit.

drbits, this is a nice and informative article.

[Jiaz]

plain link in - plain link out
container in - nothing out
crypted link in (decrypter, linkcrypter, linkfollower) in - crypted link out

our upcomming dlc2 will provide more features!