Probably just a caching issue. Can you send me a link to your page?

Can you send me the link to your page? You probably just have some sort of library conflict.

The counting doesn't distinguish between users. It just counts clicks per publication, where publications are identified using their bibbase-id constructed from author names, title, and year (the last part of the url when you click the "link" link). So no, it doesn't reset ever.

We just count the number of times users have clicked one of the links listed in the publication's url fields, which are rendered as little icons in the default style, e.g., for PDF.

Thanks for reporting this. It has been fixed now.

Hi Tom,

There is no one-shot way of doing this, but you could embed multiple listings, each limited to the years you want using a filter expression. The following four should work for the ranges you described. To embed them in a script tag, just add back the &jsonp=1 option to the URL.

• https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://bibbase.org/f/Te2uYJttNXZTTEPJt/Website.bib&folding=1&theme=side&commas=true&hidemenu=true&filter=year:19..
• https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://bibbase.org/f/Te2uYJttNXZTTEPJt/Website.bib&folding=1&theme=side&commas=true&hidemenu=true&filter=year:200.
• https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://bibbase.org/f/Te2uYJttNXZTTEPJt/Website.bib&folding=1&theme=side&commas=true&hidemenu=true&filter=year:201.
• https://bibbase.org/show?bib=https://bibbase.org/f/Te2uYJttNXZTTEPJt/Website.bib&folding=1&theme=side&commas=true&hidemenu=true&filter=year:202.

Thanks for sharing! We've looked these over and found that they do not apply to us, because the conditions described in these vulnerabilities are not met in our case (we do not compile templates from untrusted sources). So there doesn't seem to exist any urgency fixing these. It certainly doesn't hurt to upgrade these libraries and we will do so eventually.

Hi Hakase,

Sorry for the delayed response. Can you share more about the severity of the found vulnerability? Since BibBase is not showing anything sensitive or confidential -- quite the opposite actually -- I don't quite understand the possible damage a malicious actor could do based on these vulnerabilities. Did your IT support share more details?

Thanks,

Christian

Unfortunately we've been getting a lot of spam on this ticket specifically, so I'll disable commenting. I believe the upshot here is clear: this is something people want. If there is anything specific you want to say or add, please create a new ticket.

Hi Daniel,

If you are ok with enabling this behavior for all links on your page, not just the bibbase ones, then you can just add this to your page:  

<base target="_blank" />

(reference).

I don't think we currently have an option to enable it for the links generated by BibBase only.