google chrome – Do browsers create caches of local HTML assets, such as SVGs or scripts?

This question was asked over 7 years ago, but there wasn’t a definitive answer.

In the following example, does the browser know not to create a cache for these local assets?

<!doctype html>
<html>
<img src="https://superuser.com/image.png">
<script src="myscripts.js"></script>
</html>

Does the browser (Chrome in this case) create a copy in the cache on load? I’ve looked at the network log which suggests to my inexperienced eyes that it doesn’t attempt to pull from any caches, and just re-requests every time. However, I’d be very surprised if the browser caches nothing about a local HTML file.

privacy – How does Facebook know I am the same person/computer trying to make separate accounts using different browsers?

It appears Facebook doesn’t approve of my pages (or some other reason), and has deactivated my primary account. The message is “doesn’t follow our community standards” (it’s worth noting that another user posted a reply to one of my comments that I should engaged in a graphic perverted act with my son, and yet for some reason Facebook moderators have found that “it doesn’t go against community standards”). Now, we could go back and forth all day about that point, but it isn’t my question, I only provide the back story for some context.

What I am trying to achieve:

  • Create an entirely new and different user account.

What I have tried:

  1. CHROME: Logging out, trying to create a new account using a new email. Produces the same message, and it doesn’t work.
  2. CHROME: Deleting everything, every cookie, history, and cached content. Create new user with a different email. Same problem, my account has been deactivated (see screenshot)
  3. Installed OPERA, started from scratch. New username, new email. I switch wi-fi from my phone tether to my house wi-fi. Now I have a completely brand new browser, with a completely different IP. I create a brand new user, new name, birthday, email, password. Whamo! – same message. Definitely not cached. They are tracking me in some way other than a browser cookie.

Browser cookies only work within the same browser. But I started from scratch using a newly installed different browser (Opera), connected to a completely different network, and used completely different credentials. They still have identified me. How?

Your account has been disabled

sharepoint online – All my browsers (Chrome, IE, Edge, Opera and Firefox) download a Office-files instead of open it

First of all I apologize for my bad English.

If a user opens for example an xlsx file he downloads it. From now on it is no longer connected to the uploaded xlsx file and changes will not saved. That’s exactly not what I want my browsers to do. The file should be opened on the client with Excel and still connected to the file which was uploaded on the server. I’ve tested it with all my installed browsers: IE, Edge, Chrome, Firefox and Opera and it’s every time the same problem.

I’ve done some research and didn’t find any solution which works for me. The OpenInClient feature is activated. Many thanks for your help.

powershell – Invoke-WebRequest $Url gets 200 status code even though the actual status code is 500 through browsers like IE or Chrome

I have a web page which returns 500 error through IE or chrome, but when I use PowerShell Invoke-WebRequest $Url -UseBasicParsing I get 200 status instead of 500 status code.

Is there a difference between the way the browsers getting the status and Invoke-WebRequest ?.

curl and wget fail to verify wildcard Let’s Encrypt certificate, but browsers work fine

We’ve obtained a wildcard certificate from Let’s Encrypt for civility.social and *.civility.social, using certbot. This works fine on all browsers and with curl and wget when verifying https://civility.social, or https://graphql.civility.social. The A records for those (sub)domains point to the same server, from which the certbot challenge was completed.

Later we’ve added a subdomain hosted on a different server, meet.. To use the same certificate on a different server, we copied the files making up the wildcard certificate from the original server to meet.. Both servers use NGINX. The problem is that wget and curl fail to fetch anything from meet.civility.social, even though browsers don’t complain. wget fails even with --no-check-certificate.

$ $ wget -v --debug --no-check-certificate https://meet.civility.social
Setting --check-certificate (checkcertificate) to 0
Setting --check-certificate (checkcertificate) to 0
DEBUG output created by Wget 1.20.3 on linux-gnu.

Reading HSTS entries from ~/.wget-hsts
URI encoding = ‘UTF-8’
Converted file name 'index.html' (UTF-8) -> 'index.html' (UTF-8)
--2020-06-26 21:39:15--  https://meet.civility.social/
Resolving meet.civility.social (meet.civility.social)... 157.245.170.94
Caching meet.civility.social => 157.245.170.94
Connecting to meet.civility.social (meet.civility.social)|157.245.170.94|:443... connected.
Created socket 3.
Releasing 0x000055ae59be63e0 (new refcount 1).
Initiating SSL handshake.
SSL handshake failed.
Closed fd 3
Unable to establish SSL connection.


$ curl https://meet.civility.social/
curl: (60) SSL certificate problem: unable to get local issuer certificate

What might be going on here?

xss – Why are browsers makeing PUT requests for static assets on my site?

Our site hosts static assets at /assets/…. In debugging a font-related issue, I looked through our logs for unusual activity. I found a bunch of requests like these

method path                         referer
PUT     /assets/js/40-8b8c.chunk.js https://mysite.com
PUT     /assets/fonts/antique.woff2 https://mysite.com/assets/css/mobile-ef45.chunk.css

The requests come from lots of different IP addresses all over the world. I don’t see any pattern in the User-Agents. The only HTTP methods are HEAD (odd, but fine), GET (expected), and PUT (very suspicious).

I haven’t been able to identify any code in our system that would cause a browser to make PUT requests to these paths.

I have no evidence that this activity is malicious. It could certainly be a broken browser plugin.

Has anyone seen this sort of behavior?

networking – Cannot connect to a particular website in ubuntu (from all browsers)

I am trying to access a site (https://mycloud.pearson.com).The home screen appears but after entering credentials, the page is stuck and keeps on loading.

This happens only in ubuntu and in all browsers. I tried even upgrading from 16 to 18LTS version but same issue exists.

The site does not require any VPN connections and works in windows.

Is there any network manager settings missing? If so why is it affecting this one site alone? All other sites work well.

web – How can I ensure proper color rendition with browsers on wide gamut displays?

I’ve had exactly the same issue and it is possible to arrive at a correct and workable solution. There are a lot of misconceptions both in the question and the previous answers (and indeed, around colour management in general), so let me try to clear them up and provide you with an answer.

First, the misconceptions…

  1. Regular (non-wide) monitors do not “live in sRGB”, nor do wide gamut displays “live in AdobeRGB”. sRGB and AdobeRGB (together with ProPhoto RGB) are known as working profiles: they don’t match any real world device, they just provide a standard set of measurements that all devices can be programmed to understand. Every monitor (and every printer) has its own profile, and indeed that profile may change over time as the chemicals in the display age. An individual display’s profile may have a large degree of overlap with one of the standard working profiles, but it’s incorrect to say it matches it exactly, or even fits completely within it. It’s even less correct to say all displays of a certain type have profiles that fit within one of the standard working profiles.

  2. You should never set your display’s profile to one of the working profiles (because that isn’t its profile!). The correct solution is to use a calibration device to find out your monitor’s correct profile, and use that.

  3. Browsers are not the only fruit: you want to make sure your display is profiled in such a way that other imaging apps (Photoshop, Lightroom, whatever) also display colours faithfully.

  4. There is something you can do about unmanaged images in browsers (a few other answers have touched on it). I’ll come to it in detail below.

A rough guide to how profiles interact when you view an image on your monitor

In an ideal world, not one but two profiles will come into play when viewing an image. The first is the profile embedded in the image: let’s call that the input profile. Remember that digital images are made up of pixels, each containing a combination of red, green and blue. So for a plain red square, every pixel is set to 100% red, 0% green, 0% blue. But what do we mean by 100% red? It’s like seeing a sign on the road side saying “You may now drive at maximum speed”. What maximum speed? As fast as the car will go? The sign doesn’t say, so the actual speed is going to vary from car to car. What the input profile tells us is what that 100% value is relative to: for an image tagged with an embedded profile, your computer now knows that “100% red” means the maximum red value defined by that specific profile. (To complete the analogy, our road sign now says: “Maximum limit 70mph. You may now drive at the maximum.”)

So, once an image is tagged with an embedded profile we know exactly what it is we need to display: exactly what shade of red, yellow, or whatever. The next question is: how do we display it? Look at the same image on a few different computers (or just your computer and your phone) and you’ll see that no two displays render colour in exactly the same way. This is where we need to calibrate our monitor to produce a display profile – the output profile – that tells us exactly how this specific device renders colours. Now we’ve got both the pieces of information we need:

  • Input profile: What does this image mean when it says “red”?
  • Output profile: How do I get this hardware to display (as close as possible to) that shade of red?

And what if the image isn’t tagged? For all but the most specialist of usage, it’s safe to assume that an untagged image is using the sRGB profile.

And now to answer your question

The first step with any monitor – but especially important with a wide gamut display – is to correctly calibrate your monitor. This requires using a calibrator: a piece of hardware that sits over the screen and takes colour readings while displaying a range of test images, to determine what colours your monitor is actually displaying. For a wide gamut display you have to ensure you use a suitable calibrator: I use a Spyder Pro 3 and it works fine.

Once you’ve calibrated your monitor you should find that any colour-managed application is now displaying colours faithfully. Before calibration, my wide-gamut monitor displayed everything hyper-saturated: skin tones were tomato-red and both Photoshop and Lightroom were unusable. After calibration, they both looked perfect. So, use a colour-managed app to test your calibration.

And now onto the browsers! Firefox is the only browser that works well for me on a calibrated wide-gamut display. By default it uses the embedded colour profile in images to display them correctly, but untagged images still appear over-saturated. But don’t worry, all is not lost!

  • Type about:config into your address bar.
  • Scroll down and look for gfx.color_management.mode.
  • Change the value to 1.

This causes Firefox to treat all untagged images as sRGB: exactly what we want to happen. It even works on icons in your bookmarks bar! Unfortunately it still doesn’t work on flash video players though.

Both Safari and Chrome are also colour managed but both have their drawbacks. Safari (on Windows at least) doesn’t treat untagged images as sRGB; Chrome does, but its colour management is disabled by default and awkward to switch on.

At time of writing, Opera has no colour management at all and IE9 is just downright idiotic: it respects the input profile (the one embedded in the image) but ignores the display output profile! This makes IE9 as good as useless on a wide gamut display.

So: calibrate + use Firefox + set gfx.color_management.mode to 1 = you’re good. 🙂

photo editing – Image colour inconsistency between browsers, image viewers, and Photoshop

I have a problem where dark photos look quite noticeably different depending on what opens them, and specifically, on Chrome and Firefox. I’m aware this is because of colour management differences between programs.

So what I want to do, is make it so that my images look consistently the same between all the programs I use on my computer. Specifically, I want an image to look the same as it looks in a browser, because ultimately that’s how my images will be viewed. If I’m ever getting some printed, I’ll deal with print profiles and stuff then. For the purpose of this, I only want to be able to view images in browsers, and I want my own viewing experience to mimic that of the browsers people use.

I don’t want to make any configuration changes to my browsers – I want them to be roughly the defaults that “everyone else” will be using.

I’m happy to configure every other program I use so that they match, as close as possibly, the viewing experience in a web browser.

I use IrfanView, ACDSee and Photoshop. All support colour management. I’m testing in Chrome and Firefox. Both supposedly support colour management.

But I’m getting vastly different results and after many hours of trial and error, it’s doing my head in.

The closest I can get to all the images being the same everywhere is if I disable colour management entirely in IrfanView and ACDSee, and strip the ICC profile from the images so they’re untagged (which is my normal workflow anyway), and then use “Proof colours: Monitor RGB” in Photoshop, which is a hassle.

What I want is this:

  • I want JPG images which contain no metadata and no ICC profiles (I run them through jpegoptim –strip-all) to display the same in all browsers. In my testing, they seem to do this. (I believe browsers assume they are sRGB)
  • I want those images, if I open them in IrfanView, ACDSee, or Photoshop, to display (on my monitor), the same as they display in Chrome and Firefox (on my monitor)

The only way I have been able to achieve this in testing so far is to ensure no image contains a colour profile, and disable colour management in IrfanView, ACDSee, and use “Proof colours: Monitor RGB” in Photoshop. Otherwise any app with colour management on displays the images noticeably differently to the browsers, and Firefox displays images with an embedded sRGB colour profile differently to those without any profile (even though everything on the internet assures me this should not be the case as it should assume sRGB?)

I also want to be able to:

  • I want new images I am opening, say from my camera, which probably do contain an sRGB ICC profile, to display the same in Photoshop while I’m editing them as they will display in the browser.
  • The only way I’ve managed to do this is to use “Proof colours: Monitor RGB”, which is a hassle as I have to remember to toggle it on for every single photo
  • I’d also like them to display in ACDSee, or IrfanView, the same as they will when I open then in Photoshop, and ideally the same as they will when they’re viewed in a browser (though technically no unedited photo will ever be viewed in a browser, so as long as they display the same after editing, I guess it’s ok)

Considering I have (theoretically) calibrated monitors with their own profiles, and Chrome and Firefox and all the apps I’m using are all supposedly colour-managed, it seems like I’m doing something wrong here, but I have tried every combination I can think of settings over the past several hours and the only thing that comes close to being consistent amongst the various apps – most importantly, between both Chrome and Firefox – is stripping the colour profiles from the images, and turning off colour-management in all my viewing apps.

I’ve read numerous posts on the matter, but sadly, none have really helped.

I feel like this must be a common issue, because a lot of people must be like me and take digital photos, and edit them only for the web.

What should I do!?

Catalina – Mysterious underlines in ALL browsers under macOS

I am running an old web application that is still working properly (PHP / MySQL). When I use a macOS Catalina, characters with the following underscore appear as follows:

Enter the image description here

The source code looks perfect:


This happens on two Macs as well as in Safari, Firefox and Chrome. The text is rendered normally under Windows.

I don't understand why and I don't even know how to search for it online.