+ Add Question

Outlook Add-in: No login boxes

L

Hi, I have someone who I am trying to support who is using the Todoist add-in for Outlook, but when Outlook opens the Todoist add in appears blank, with no option to log in.

I have installed the add in for myself and it works fine. The person I am supporting has similar rights to me, is using the same version of Outlook and has the same anti-virus installed.

Is there anything else I can check with regards to this? I figure that as I can get it on a similar system there should be something specific about his settings. Not sure if this has anything to do with it, but he uninstalled and re-installed and did not get the option to install the VTSO software as well? Whereas I did and so did his colleague who tested?

Thanks,

Lea

All responses

David Trey staff
Replied on May 09, 2014 - 16:43

Hello Lea,

Unfortunately, this is an issue we've been trying to reliably identify for quite some time. We hope to find its source soon and release an update, but it's very difficult to reproduce :-(

Based on other reports, in some cases it's the anti-virus software that blocks Todoist from connecting. In other cases, the data seems to be there, but invisible and you can only see it if you try to resize the plugin pane.

Aside from that we're unfortunately not sure yet what's the exact circumstance in which this issue occurs :-(


Best regards,
David

Adrian Spoerri premium
Replied on Jun 06, 2014 - 08:49

I have exactly the same here. Only the about button shows information. Logout don't work and the side tab is empty. At least, the add Todoist Button don't work as well

Outlook 14.0.7106.5003 (32-Bit)
Windows 7
Kaspersky Endpoint Security 8 for Windows (8.1.0.646

If I can provide some additional informations or testing a new add-in, please don't hesitate to contact me

Clyde Romo staff
Replied on Jun 06, 2014 - 08:52

Hi,

Have you tried disabling Kaspersky to see if that helps? As David mentioned, we're still looking into what's really causing this. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Regards,

Clyde

Adrian Spoerri premium
Replied on Jun 09, 2014 - 17:07

Hi,



I have tested with my company notebook outside the company network today. I
connected my private network and dum roll, the plugin is working without any
restrictions.



It seems that a firewall or such a security setting within the company
network blocking todoist... It is definitively not Kaspersky because I have
no rights do deactivate this service and it works here at home as well.



Through which port communicate the plugin? Or asked differently, what need
the plugin to communicate?

David Trey staff
Replied on Jun 09, 2014 - 18:16

Hello,

Technically, the plugin is a frame that uses a Chrome engine to connect to https://todoist.com so basically it communicates as a browser using the standard 8080 port... or rather - 443 since we use SSL all the time.


Best regards,
David

Adrian Spoerri premium
Replied on Jun 13, 2014 - 08:34

It is interessting because now in my company network, the plug-in can not syncronize. On the bottom of the list is the red warning icon shown. But I use google chrome... what can be the cause? Do you have some additional ideas?

David Trey staff
Replied on Jun 13, 2014 - 14:34

So, to clarify, if you use Todoist on the web in Chrome on your company network - it works with no issues, but through the plugin it can't sync?

Have you asked your system administrator about this? Maybe they're blocking connection for such plugins?


Best regards,
David

Adrian Spoerri premium
Replied on Jun 18, 2014 - 21:28

Yes you are right! No, I havent ask our IT about that, becaus normally, they want technical informations, what is needed.

I understand, the plug-in is chrome frame, but what I don't understand. What makes the difference? Do you have an idea?

Regards,
Adrian

David Trey staff
Replied on Jun 18, 2014 - 21:42

Adrian,

I believe it's the fact that it is a frame that causes problems. It's similar to our Gmail extension - because the extension connects to Todoist from within Gmail, then Todoist's cookies are considered third-party by Chrome (because technically Todoist becomes a third party site in Gmail).

That said, although it may work in your browser, in Outlook it may be considered malware because of how it behaves - it establishes a connection to a website that can interact with emails (link them as tasks). So in case of Chrome you just have a browser doing what it should - visiting a site, in case of our plugin, you're using Outlook that uses a Chrome frame that connects to a site.

Please let the administrator know that you'd like to run a VSTO plugin in Outlook that is based on Chromium and would connect to todoist.com and cloudfront.net (that's our file hosting server). They may either whitelist the plugin itself or at least these URLs.


Best regards,
David

Adrian Spoerri premium
Replied on Jul 17, 2014 - 10:16

Hello David

Our IT has added todoist.com to the firewall whitelist, now it works
But they write me some problems with cloudfront.net:

**************
But
We are unable to allow this domain - cloudfront.net as this domain public ip changes every time and there are number of public ip which we are unable to find.
To allow this we need to allow access to any for port 443 and 80 but this will not be allow due to security reason.
Please check with the plug-in support team. If this domain would required or it will be ok if todoist.com access present.
If the domain required please ask how this url works (fixed public ip).
*************

Can you help me?
Thanks again for your support

Best regards,
Adrian

David Trey staff
Replied on Jul 17, 2014 - 11:39

Adrian,

That's correct. Cloudfront.net is a secure server from Amazon (which is our host) that we use for file storage. It will use hashed sub-domains and may change its IP - that's for security so it's hard to get access to any uploaded file. We also store our CSS files on this domain.

Could you please ask your administrators why would they need to whitelist the IP and not the domain? The domain cloudfront.net doesn't change and it's highly unlikely that someone would get hold of it so enabling the domain shouldn't be a problem :-)


Best regards,
David