Forum:Zip file upload

I want to upload a zip file to http://ru.jfx.wikia.com wiki. The message what I see is '".zip" is an unwanted file type. List of allowed file types: png, gif, jpg, jpeg, ico, ogg, pdf, xcf, svg, mid, jl'

What should I do to allow zip file uploading on the wiki. Should I ask administrators to do that or is there any others way?


 * Right, we have exactly this problem at http://jfx.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page


 * We need to upload few jar files with examples of Java code/classes inside. However, it seems to be impossible. If anyone is aware about ways of solving this - it'd be mostly appreciated.


 * Regards,
 * Cos


 * I dont think permitting archive file formats would be benefical to any wiki. Archives can contain anything, from "illegal" MP3 to more malicious things. It could impact on other wikias...
 * If you want to put code on a wiki page, you can. Directly on the page. But, you can put it in a kind of scrolling boxe so it dont clutter the page with big blob of code. TulipVorlax 18:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Could it be possible to store zip files in an http server and link them from the wiki?
 * If so, does anybody know a good http server for the this purposes?


 * Hey! Do you know how to sign your messages on talk and forum pages ? Typing four ~ symbols in a row at the end of the message sould do the trick. And there's also a button above the edit window.
 * A simple response to your question would be no, i dont know anything like that. Can you say what would contain thoses archived files ? Maybe there's another way... If it's some kind of home made piece of software (that is not malicious in any manner) i think there's somes "services" to host that. But i dont know how to apply for thoses (for now). TulipVorlax 04:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I am new to this wiki so I do not know all about it. That is why I ask some help.
 * I want to put some JavaFX projects to http://ru.jfx.wikia.com wiki. The projects usually contain some fx source files, some java files and some images. May be someone knows where is a right place to store java, C/C++ and others projects?
 * Thanks,
 * Raindrop 08:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Currently, the only way i've seen that type of code on a wiki is like this :


 * That bit of C# code comes from there : . It was juste for the example. If you want to provide code files of exemple projects, and that include a big bunch of files, i'm not sure it would be possible on a wiki. But, putting the code in the page could be a good solution, that way, they dont have to download it to see it. And syntax highlighting would be easy to do. What do you think ? TulipVorlax 20:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * GitHub is a good public code repository for this purpose. You could upload your code there if there's so much code and link to it from the wiki. Also, allows to create branches and merges to do collaborative projects. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 10:52, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

There are legitimate uses for zip - any malicious use relies on a careless user, correct?
Am I the only reader who has grown tired of reading of the malicious things an unscrupulous person could do to abuse an archive format such as zip/rar/tar etc. I do not doubt the possibility of such formats being abused but I do not think the probability or extent of this abuse is as high or widespread as opponents to such archive formats would have us believe.


 * A game wiki I contribute to would immediately benefit from uploading and categorizing ZIP files for other members to subsequently download because that is a standard format that is adopted by the game maker and therefore the player community for sharing so-called "boat model" and "boat skin" files. The file formats of the component files are not on the allowed list and do not lend themselves to ASCII posting on a wiki page. I suppose that a uuencode filter could be used to do exactly that however in practice community members are not going to have the patience to deal with uuencode/uudecode steps to share such files.
 * It seems to me that figuring out a way to accommodate ZIP, TAR, RAR formats at Wikia would improve some wiki communities ability to attract members.

When a user downloads a zip file from an untrusted source they have the option (if not the responsibility or obligation) of scanning that file for any malware before viewing or otherwise accessing/using it's content. If there genuinely is a form of harm that can come from merely storing a zip file on a file server then I'd really like to see a link to a credible explanation of how that is technically possible because I have never seen it for myself and I suspect that it is rumor mongering that plays on fear rather than fact. In the cases I have read or heard of the weak link is invariably the human failing to check/scan the file for malware before using it.

I have to believe this subject has been studied thoroughly in the past. A link to that discussion would be helpful here. -najevi 07:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you got it wrong.
 * The reason why i was saying that ZIP should not be accepted on wikia was only that people would now ne able to upload tons of files that could be copyrighted if not worse.
 * Would you really like to be force to download and unzip every zip files uploaded to wikis you administer just to check they really contain what the uploader say it contain ?
 * And what if somes files would have been forgotten and then an user complain that it was containing porn ?
 * Not much, i suppose. The file can be delete as soon as someone report the bad content.
 * As for zip files possibly containing virus, as Wikia is trying to be more user friendly for newcommers, even people who just have buyed their first computer the same day they come here (it can happen), do you think thoses kind of users are supposed to know about scanning files ?
 * I suppose everyone normally knows everything without any need to learn things from others first.
 * If the virus part can removed from the equation, the "checking the legality" of the content part can't be. — TulipVorlax 08:35, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * So allow zip file upload for admins only, or only show them when they have been marked "patrolled". It can be done if you really want to. -- ◄mendel► 13:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

There is a 10MB file size limit for the currently allowed file types and so I would expect the same file size limit for ZIP or other archive formats when (and I do sincerely believe it is a matter of when and not if) they are inevitably supported. There is no limit on the quantity of media and open office data files that may be uploaded to a wiki and I can imagine no good reason for having one rule for media and data file formats and a different rule for archive file formats. In today's world a distributor of pirated media would be crazy to choose 10MB bundles when there is a plethora of more efficient methods for illegally distributing copyright media, software, data and text files.
 * The risks - file server overload: upload ton's of files? ...

Let's first remind ourselves that wiki admins/sysops are facilitators and not gatekeepers or police. Therefore, I cannot accept any premise that involves or suggests that each uploaded file (whether it be ZIP, image, video, audio, data or otherwise) be previewed/checked by an admin/sysop/helper or any such "special" community member. It may be subtle, but it is plain and simple fact that for a file (of any one of those various file types) to be judged suitable/unsuitable for a wiki community, it must first be downloaded to somebody's computer for viewing, listening or opening with a compatible application.
 * The risks - copyright infringement and pornography: copyrighted if not worse? ...
 * ZIP and other archive formats are not substantially different from an image or video or audio or office document file today.
 * A regular community member is no more or less able than an administrator to view, playback, listen to, open or read a file in order to recognize which are copyright, which are pornographic and which are not.

The matter of copyright material finding it's way onto a wiki is one that has needed to be dealt with long ago. The uploading user is expected to select a suitable copyright tag. A presumption of acting in good faith applies. Archive file formats do not need any different procedure than this.

The matter of pornography (or indeed any material violating a community's social norms) has also been dealt with before now. The recurring theme is a method for rapid response to whatever offensive material may be. We used to see this played out on a daily basis while Wikia were adopting the so-called impression advertising within the article content space. I no longer notice it - thanks to various filters.

I don't have the necessary depth of technical experience to be able to describe the possible ways that a harmful "payload" might be hidden within any one of the currently supported file formats. I do have enough combined experience and reading to appreciate that such malicious payloads can be embedded. If you accept this point as fact then no reasonable person would suggest that an admin/sysop be responsible for inspecting every uploaded file of the following 5 broad types for pre-approval.
 * The risks - malware: check they really contain what the uploader say it contain ? ...
 * 1) text (I count source code, CSV and XML files within this text category and could, at a stretch, count any uuencoded file)
 * 2) image
 * 3) video
 * 4) audio
 * 5) data (I count open office documents within this data category)

Any user can mark an undesirable file for deletion or for speedy deletion. With that process in mind, let's please acknowledge this very important presumption:
 * The response mechanism:
 * that a user uploading a file to a wiki is presumed to be acting in good faith until another community member has indicated otherwise. (using the {delete} template) Only then does an uploaded file warrant closer scrutiny.

Each wiki hosted by Wikia is quality assured/policed/inspected as a by-product of the collaborative effort of it's community of browsers and contributors. It is a model that seems successful even though it may not be an idiot-proof model. I can imagine no credible argument for adopting a different model for ZIP or other archive file formats. I think the least credible argument is one which reasons that the internet novice or the computer illiterate be the "litmus test" or measure by which the many and varied benefits to the whole community and/or the potential utility of a wiki should be determined.

I am quite willing to pay attention to a credible and well reasoned explanation of how supporting archive file formats would demand any different (i) safety precautions, (ii) quality assurance procedures, (iii) copyright attribution methods, etc. than have already been put in place to accommodate the 5 broad categories of file mentioned above. -najevi 07:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Presently, uploaded files are being scanned whether they conform to the file type their extensions suggests they have. It would be a logical update to make sure the files in the zip archives are not executable program files (in fact, open office documents are already a sort of zip archive) and change from a model that allows certain known file types to one that forbids certain others (and that would still keep the virus/malware problem at bay). It would, however, present a problem in keeping "non-free" file types off the wiki; this is a problem of Open Content philosphy, however.
 * The checking of the files is simple: either they are tied in with articles that relate to them, in which case there'll be interest on part of the readership to examine them, or they won't, which means they can be removed as "orphaned" after a suitable period. -- ◄mendel► 12:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)