Urge users to update Tampermonkey

[GreenLunar]

Use an information bar (a line that pops up from top of a page), similarly to popup blocking or accept cookies notifications, that would ask users to update to recent version of Tampermonkey.

Also, add a News entry about this occurrence, so other developers of User script engines would take this overload scenario into consideration.

@derjanb, please post your feedback on this matter.

[Martii]

Not liking the too busy check ay ;) What's weird is usage almost always raises around 5pm-8pm EST and 5am-8am EST... odd that it's almost symmetrical time wise.

There's no reliable form of identification though that I know of... unless something changed in Chromium/Chromes/Androids identification. e.g. someone needs to tell us how to fingerprint it reliably before we would do that.

[Martii]

@GreenLunar
I think it might be better to have a feed, either RSS or Atom for #914 (how is the search going over there btw) ... however...

@derjanb
I don't see a feed (text or icons) on tampermonkey.net for this... Does this exist? Thanks for another moment of your time.

[derjanb]

@Martii
Not at the moment, cause I went to bed 2 a.m. after our conversation (CEST) and on Sundays my wife, my daughter and I usually visit my mother-in-law. However, after lunch there is some time to work. :)
I'm focusing on new Opera and Safari releases at the moment. Do you see many requests by those users? How is the traffic doing in general?

[Martii]

@derjanb
Like clockwork two times a day we get hit now... I've kept some of it at bay with memory checks just recently and will do some more after some more pondering.

If you could get a RSS feed up at some point we'll definitely add you when #914 gets completed... no rush because we don't have that implemented just yet. LOL ;)

[derjanb]

There's no reliable form of identification though that I know of... unless something changed in Chromium/Chromes/Androids identification. e.g. someone needs to tell us how to fingerprint it reliably before we would do that.

Tampermonkey sends Accept: text/x-userscript-meta, */* at meta data requests (if at all ;)) and Accept: text/x-userscript, */* when it requests a script. I don't think other script handlers send the second one. So this could help you to identify TM users regardless of their user agent, but only when they're downloading a script.

[Martii]

text/x-userscript, */*

That's what we are being bombarded with... plus we might have an issue with text/x-userscript-meta, */* which I'll look into right now.

[derjanb]

And the user agents? It's all caused by Chrome browsers or also Opera and Safari?

[Martii]

Well Chrome's UA's are bit duplicative... so I see Safari for sure.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/49.0.2623.110 Safari/537.36

[Martii]

Here's an Opera

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/44.0.2403.155 Safari/537.36 OPR/31.0.1889.174

[derjanb]

But it's hard to say whether this are normal or "faulty" requests, right?

[Martii]

Unlikely that it's normal as @TimidScript reported 70K installs... that's not normal.

[derjanb]

I'm aware that Chrome users cause a lot of requests at the moment and I guess that since TM is not doing a meta data request, but is downloading the complete script source, OUJS counts every update request as installation, but I might be wrong.

However, my question was whether the "faulty" requests are caused by other browsers as well. "Faulty" means repeated downloads for no reason. But I think this is very hard to say when the log files overflow.

[Martii]

The snapshot I grabbed in the terminal had thousands of Chrome starting UA's... when I get done splitting out the Accept header which has been extended by TM I'll see if that improves things with the meta routine routes. As far as requesting goes the scripts aren't that popular twice a day. ;)