• Welcome to the Chevereto user community!

    Here users from all over the world gather around to learn the latest about Chevereto and contribute with ideas to improve the software.

    Please keep in mind:

    • 😌 This community is user driven. Be polite with other users.
    • 👉 Is required to purchase a Chevereto license to participate in this community (doesn't apply to Pre-sales).
    • 💸 Purchase a Pro Subscription to get access to active software support and faster ticket response times.

Privacy mode is misunderstood

Status
Not open for further replies.
vlaur

vlaur

Chevereto Member
I have a lot of people which is using
crNqzuR.png
believing that hide image from public view on website, and yes that is doing but in wrong way. When someone use that function and want to embed this image in some forums it can't be seen by others. I think this function need to be retouched, I mean need be 2 way of privacy, hiden from explore page but allowed to be seen by other from link sharing/embed ... without account, and full private when can bee seen just on website by image uploader/owner.

And when multiple image is uploaded to be another check button to ask users if them want it to be into album or not, because i have a lot of image in albums just with 1 image on it, and all of this because of this privacy function which creates confusions.

Thank and I hope to fix it asap, beacuse i don't want to have 1000 rows of albums in database just for 1 image on it.
 
Last edited:
I agree with your comments about being forced to have an album for private images. You should be able to set the status of individual images to private.

As to your other concerns, I don't think what you're asking is possible and I don't think the privacy feature is unclear. Are you saying that your users don't believe that they will be able to embed images if they set an image to private or they are actually having trouble doing so? As far as I can see, it all depends on which emeded code they're using. If its the simple image emeded code, there shouldn't be any problems. If its the Media + image emeded code, it will only be a problem when they click the image, because this is linked to a private page.

There isn't a simple way around this. Most webservers allow you to restrict access to a directory based on http referrer, but this isn't likely to be practical for dynamic platforms like chevereto (it's also not very clean). The way I see it, either the emeded code block on a private image page needs to be removed or some solution needs to be developed whereby the image page can be accessed directly (even if the image is set to private) but that page does not appear on a user's page or in any of their albums.
 
Private mode works only for albums because that is the most efficient way of doing it. Allow privacy for each image is a really bad idea when you have a system that also has album privacy setup. Album is like a folder, is private or public.

Now, private means that the access to the picture is only for "me". That is the current privacy option and of course that if in the future we add friends and things like that you could tell the system that they can access to the photo.

Direct image embed works and that is not an issue. Since the access is restricted the only person which has access to where is the file is the content owner and this person can embed this image.
 
imagebam, imgbox and others have this option to chose what to do with images, for example albums to be public by default, and to set on upload if image(s) is family safe or adult.

I don't want to see anymore my users making this mistake to chose privacy and to make an album just for one image.

For you and others website administrator this is something easy, but for normal users this is a function that causes confusion.

My sugestion for this:
-When users is uploding an image to be asked if want it to be into an already existing album or to create another new one.
-If is created another new album to chose if it will be private or public, but by default this to be public.

ZyRMPyn.png
 
Images won't have separated privacy and content type flag will be added later on. Honestly I don't care how other systems works. Flickr for instance don't have album privacy so based on that (since is the largest) should I copy them? Or I should do what imgur, 500px or anyone else does? I don't work like that, I work on my personal experience, the end user feedback and large A/B testings.

System does what you see and what I feel and test to work. If you want something else you are free to customize it. The thing that I always say is this: When something affects a large population of persons is because that needs to be changed but this thing is only making noise in your head. Honestly I don't see the confusion. The thing says "toggle privacy for this upload" not "toggle privacy for these images" and once the process is done the thing tells you what happens and what to do next. If you are not happy whit that fell free to customize the uploader at your will. Is expected that some people that is used to other platforms feels a litte dizzy at the beginning but that is normal. Even when I saw Facebook for the first time I said "what the f*ck is this" but with time people get used to.
 
Last edited:
By the way, there will be an improved uploader soon and hopefully the system options won't be misunderstood by some people.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top