File names in forum software

When I download files from this forum in a manual, “download file as…” form, the file names don’t match the name on post, but are rather the background file naming process name such as

“363b4dd0cf253b86eec1536a7db2983774a331ee” instead of “”

Can anyone edify me as to how I can automatically get the file name used by the poster without having to go through a copy/paste process?

Just click it?

What browser are you using? In Chrome just clicking it automatically downloads it to my downloads directory for me, with the correct name.

True, that works, but I like to download to specific folders (such as in the aforementioned example where the file should go in a specific place) to avoid double handling…

As it stands now I have to either click it and move the file afterwards or go through the abovementioned filename copy/paste process, which seems inefficient to me.

: and using safari

In Chrome at least you can specify a general directory but at the same time stipulate that you’ll be prompted after clicking a file as to where exactly you want to save the file. I’d hope that Safari has a similar setting.

it does, but when that prompt arises, the file name has changed to the hash mentioned.

Edit: ultimately it’s not a huge deal, but it seems to happen with this specific forum software and nowhere else, and I wondered if there were a setting somewhere I could change.

I just tried what @Unity2k suggested in Chrome on Win10 - enable prompt. That worked fine and I learned something today. Didn’t get a weird filename.

Download Chrome for OSX maybe? :slight_smile:

I’ve a healthy resistance to using google stuff, but I just tried it in Firefox (which I could have done in the first instance!) and it worked there, so must be a Safari thing.

Thanks for the suggestion.

1 Like

That’s good, but you should know the reasons you stay away from Google products all hold true with apple software as well. Just saying… :grin:

I am curious as to why Safari is loosing the file name and giving you a hash instead.


Yeah, but Apple have more ideologically sound lies :grin: Google has their malefic intent writ large in their TOC’s…which i guess is a KIND of integrity :smiley: Apple at least make a public display of resisting ubiquitous state surveillance.

I’m also curious, prefer not to switch browsers for a specific task. As I say it appears to happen only with this forum software.

Call me a pessimist, but I don’t believe that had anything to do with Apple’s concern for their customers, and was more the perfect opportunity for them to grand stand amidst waning sales and get positive press coverage that would help people overlook them intentionally gimping old iPhones and iPads, for example.

But I get what you mean.

For your purposes I think you would really be better served by a browser that shares your ideals. Vivaldi and the Brave browsers come to mind. Firefox I guess as well, but I really can’t stand Mozilla these days. There is also the Iron browser which is a Chrome browser stripped of all Google’s internal hooks.


1 Like

That sounds like a winner - cheers!

I wouldn’t even call you a pessimist, just a realist :grinning:

You’ll note that I said their lies are more ideologically sound, not their actions!

Thanks fot the Vivaldi and Iron tips, I’ll look into it. I do have Brave, but never took to it as it seemed to have a very specific torrenting focus. I hear what you say about Firefox…it purports to be security conscious but I find it hard to use without letting it dial home to everyone…

I use ‘Little Snitch’ on a Mac -it reveals everything your computer tries to do… it’s outrageous! I have it in hardline tinfoil hat brigade mode (I made that up) at all times because … explicit content deleted :joy:

I also use Cookie:

If you don’t know why you should be using these tools or similar, watch these:


I love the idea of Little Snitch! However, and I assume you know this, but if anyone is able to access root rights on your computer (which don’t all require internet access) little snitch can be bypassed pretty easily.



I started using Little Snitch 15 years ago, which was the first time I’d considered that software on my computer was calling home. As you say it’s now outrageous the amount of attemted outbound communication not explicitly authorised/requested.

I figure that if anyone wants to get my stuff, they will, and all things considered I don’t have anything to hide, its more that I object to these f*ckers making money of what is my data without paying me a cut for the privilege. There will be laws regarding personal data and privacy that will include moral distribution of profits from using these data in the future I think.

In the mean time, I like to make it as difficult as possible and generate data that is completely made up to obsfucate my real habits and screw up their algorithms in the process… think I like looking at synths, how about a little dose of ‘my little pony’ - you know that kind of thing!

My favourite show about this stuff is The Prisoner, Patrick McGooHan is simply brilliant as the adversary ‘they’ don’t know everything about, I love the scene where they say they know everything about it except why he resigned, for instance, we know you take your tea like this… to which his response is to add sugar - brilliant - just brilliant!

My favourite philosophical quote, and the one by which I live my life more than any other is from Albert Camus:


It’s kinda like locks on houses (or even more poingnantly suitcases!). I was looking at a commercial premises to rent yesterday and the landlord brought the wrong keys, went to get another set whilst leaving me waiting for 30 minutes, which also turned out to be incorrect…and I didn’t get to view the space! I could have accessed the room in 3 minutes without doing any material damage but it seemed improprietous to do so. The landlord said “I hate keys” and I suggested “they’re really only a deterrent to honest burglars”.

It’s much the same with computer security. Any state security agency or enterprising adolescent can access my computer without question. I wondered for years, given IMEI numbers etc. how mobile telephone traffic could be considered secure, and then we discovered that sim manufacturers had backdoors. Recently we’ve discovered there was a hardware backdoor that left every device vulnerable simply by connecting to a network…

I choose to make some efforts to make it more difficult for my data to be accessed, but I recognise the ultimate futility.

^^ Meanwhile @anon83620728 says more or less the same!

1 Like

The absence of something like little snitch on windows is weird. I personally can’t stand Apple. OS X has some niceties, but linux would be better. Still I know windows intimately. Surprising they haven’t ported little snitch. I mean Windows kernel isn’t that obscure, and the windows 10 native firewall is incredibly robust as evidence of that. I suppose all little snitch is then is a firewall that make it easy to configure and decipher in real time.

Of course I submit that running your own DNS and filtering (blocking ports, etc.) is probably a better method of stopping traffic than keeping it local to a computer.


I thought Windows 10 marked a whole new level of uninvited communication offsite ie invasion of privacy?

Kinda, except it will let you know all processes that use the same port individually so it’s a finer grain of control than just opening a port and allowing all traffic through.

1 Like