Slashdot Mirror
GoDaddy Serves Blank Pages to Safari & Opera
zackmac writes "For over two weeks domain registrar GoDaddy has been serving blank pages to Safari and Opera users who attempt to access sites using its domain forwarding and masking service. GoDaddy is blaming Apple as the source of the problem, and with nowhere to turn, Mac users are flocking to Apple's support forums to discuss the issue in-depth. Apple has so far been unresponsive and GoDaddy has directed affected customers to contact Apple Support. An inconvienent workaround is to open the website first in Firefox or Internet Explorer and then the page will load in Safari or Opera. Speculation abounds as to the cause of the problem and how to fix it. The current belief is malformed headers, an invalid 302 header with a bogus location and a redirect loop."
Is there some kind of hidden meaning to this...Anti-Mac GODaddy anyone?
I just put my wife's photography site online yesterday, and it's hosted via domain masking/redirection from godaddy. Anyone with Oprah or Safari have trouble getting to it?
http://www.photosparks.com/
GoDaddy blames Apple for both Safari and Opera simultaneously ceasing to work? That's a nice trick
goDaddy has horrible support. They banned my domain and claimed thousands of people were getting emails pointing to my site to capture ebay passwords. I had been using this auction add-on for ecommerce. To cut a long story short, I moved to yahoo which offers free dns forwarding!
Update: GoDaddy said that not all Safari are having difficulty accessing forwarded domain names and disclaimed responsibility for the problems; the company, however, indicated that the problem would be fixed, but gave no specific time frame: "we have determined the issue is NOT related to a glitch in our service, but rather with a product supplied by one of our vendors. We are actively working on resolving this issue and expect it to be fixed shortly."
The last update that I'm aware of on this browser was Nov. 29, but from what I've read of TFA and some of the user comments, they're not related. I spoke to a friend of mine at work today about this who is an avid Safari user and he said his work computer has the problem but his home computer does not.
I would almost definitely relate this to a malformed header problem as the summary states... Xserv
"I love lamp."
Hasn't this happened to IE yet?
perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
Why is this only a "belief". It's fairly trivial to check the response header.
The best solution to this problem is to avoid Godaddy entirely. They are fast making Verisign and ICANN look reputable.
There has to be a better alternative than Go Daddy.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
wtf, this is so minor, who the hell cares? OSX/Safari and firefox blow IE away. This is useless information posted to slashdot. This is godaddy's problem, not apple's or firefox. apple and firefox are not the ones directing their site towards a MS windows IE environment. This is the most ridiculous article ive seen on slashdot.
> GET / HTTP/1.1
< HTTP/1.x 302 Moved Temporarily /?ABCDEFGH
< Location:
> GET /?ABCDEFGH HTTP/1.1
< HTTP/1.x 302 Moved Temporarily
< Location: /
> GET / HTTP/1.1
< HTTP/1.x 200 OK
It appears that the page is redirecting and then redirecting back. I can imagine that would confuse some browsers. Especially if the browser cached the first redirect and didn't actually fetch the same exact page a second time.
There is probably something in the http spec about not caching temporary redirects. In fact not caching them makes perfect sense to me. So safari has a bug of some sort with redirect caching.
However, what the server is doing seems to be fairly brain dead as well. Why would you redirect away and then redirect back? It appears that there is not cookie set between the two. The server must be remembering your IP address and serving you actual content on the second hit from that IP Address. That would certainly explain the "teaching issue" that causes safari to work with these sites after visiting with firefox.
The only explanation that I can come up with is that somebody discovered this obscure caching bug in safari and built a system to expose it. It seems that the blank page problem would be easy to fix in either safari or the web server.
These guys are really shiny and nice looking, electronically, but their tech support is terrible. they never add requested features, cannot acknowledge outages and their billing department is clueless.
I've gone back to running my own server just out of sheer frustration!
They own many of their value added companies, but act as if they don't so they can pass the buck/point fingers.
They spend more on marketing than on servicing.
"The current belief" ? WTF ? Anyone sufficiently technically savvy, with a knowledge of the HTTP protocol, with 5 min of free time could tcpdump the traffic to immediately identify the origin of the problem. I find it strange that nobody has yet been able to do it...
I had this same problem with my registrar (DomainDirect) and after messing with it I realized that they dont redirect to the IP address that i specified in my domain forwarding instructions, they actuallly serve a blank frame from their OWN domain and then fill it in with the HTML from the site that I redirected to. This is apparently so they can offer forwarding statistics and sub-domain forwarding.
The solution was to ignore the "domain forwarding" settings and go right to the zone file definition. The zone file had the domain pointing to the provider, and then from THERE they did their bogus "frame filling". Once the zone file was edited to point at my server, everything cleared up for all browsers.
GoDaddy is obviously using a frame that has some useless IE-specific tags. The users of GD should just cut the GD zone out of the loop.
-- There are two kinds of motorcycles. 1: German. 2: Crap.
I am using squid proxy, but it shouldn't be a problem.
Notice that I specified HTTP/1.1, but it never even gave me a chance to specify a host header. The 302 came almost immediately after I hit Enter on the GET line. I can't see how that could possibly be a Safari or Opera problem.
Define an agile browser, please.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
GoDaddy can GoFuckThemSelves
#!/
I have confirmed it, using Mac OSX 10.3.9 using safari the page does not load. I'm confused how godaddy can blame apple when the problem effects opera users as well.. Than again why accept blame yourself and deal with it when you can just blame someone else.
for the reply. My host is cheap, but it's not hosted at home, so they can probably spare the bandwidth. And I've never gotten near using up my monthly bandwidth allocation, so it probably wasn't that brave of me after all.
By the way, is your name Dutch? I spent a few years in Germany near the border of NL, and we popped over all the time for shopping/movies/dining, etc.
So, maybe it is an Opera and Safari problem after all. Perhaps they don't deal with the first redirect properly, or they don't deal with multiple levels of redirects. If I had to guess, I'd say this is indicative of some sort of load balancing at GoDaddy.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14
rooooar
GoDaddy's server is returning:
This is a violation of RFC 2616. Section 14.30 specifies the Location header to contain an absolute URI:
Firefox is tolerant of the spec violation and Safari and Opera are apparently not. I spent many years writing HTTP proxies and after working around many broken clients and server, I have little sympathy for those who violate the spec and then whine that others should work around the problem. GoDaddy needs to fix their server. Accomodating their brokeness, just will encourage others to be sloppy as well.
When I click on the Gallery link I get a 1" x 1" box with a lower case "f" in it. :)
Most likely, If i click the "f" a macromedia flash animation will appear. I'm not willing to take that chance.
I'm using firefox on linux and I use the firefox flash blocker extension.
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
like omg they so bad omg omgomg
I read most of the apple forum. It took a whole week for the first technical explanation to appear. Another week later and one person says it looks like malformed 302 headers.
Do people like banging on their computers until it magically starts working?
Also Godaddy's servers are not allowing client headers to be sent.
Godaddy's servers IMMEDIATLY respond with the redirect not allowing the client to specify it's user agent, the host it's trying to access (http 1.1 spec) or any other headers. as it responds with the 302 reponse after ONE CR/LF instead of 2 CR/LF which is required by the HTTP specification..
This is CLEARLY Go Daddy incorrectly following the HTTP specification with their server.
This is not a bug but a feature in Safari. Internet Explorer and Firefox will display http://www.stealyourpassword.com/paypal as http://www.paypal.com/ while Safari will show it's true address. It's to avoid forwarding addresses that are spoofed.
My mistake was showing the wife that jAlbum supports skins. She HAD to use the one with flash, no matter how hard I tried to convince her otherwise. It's really not that bad, though. Promise.
Clicked the link, Opera 8.5, XPsp2, site loaded right up.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
thats what they want. If you dont use your gift card then they get free money.
I think he meant argile, like the image of this old man I found, while searching for argile: http://www.geogr.muni.cz/agile2001/agile-fotky/68. jpg
it's a sig, wtf?
Did this guy just call my browser Oprah?
Wow.. I work for GoDaddy and I have heard nothing regarding us blaming Apple for this problem. I've heard plenty about us blaming another vendor (whom I can't name), but not Apple. Unfortunately, it's not a problem that can be fixed until this unnamed vendor provides a patch.
I would agree with you except for the fact that the error is obviously on GoDaddy's end, and they are blaming Apple. If the article stated that there was a problem, and GoDaddy had no intention of fixing it because it only affect a small number of people, it would be unfortunate, but expected. As it is, they are trying to pass the buck and blame someone else. Also, point of fact, Safari and Opera have more than 0.25% marketshare. So, all things considered, your post is a troll. Rather than mod you down, I thought I should explain why you will be modded down by someone else shortly.
Rhapsody in Numbers
The problem with the 302 response is not the relative URL in the Location: header, it's the lack of blank line after the headers. The RFC requires this and Safari's network stack doesn't (yet) support tolerance of this quirk.
GoDaddy.com learned that some customers using the Apple Safari web browser were having difficulty accessing forwarded domain names. At this time, we have determined the issue is NOT related to a glitch in our service, but rather with a product supplied by one of our vendors. We are actively working on resolving this issue and expect it to be fixed shortly.
:|
It doesn't actually look as though GoDaddy is blaming Apple as much as simply not knowing what the actual culprit is. A small, but possibly important, difference.
That being said, I really hate their name.
#SickNotWeak
I'm using Safari 2.0.2 (416.13) on OS X 10.4.3
GoDaddy's superbowl commercial for this year should be BLANK! That'd be an accurate representation of the service.
Dude, I've got Oprah 8.5, and the built-in Book Club feed and default Oprah skin are total selling points.
just back off, god. mob mentality is so retarded on the internet. especially from you minority zealots. "BUT MY 0.25% of the market share browser doesn't work flawlessly, waaaaaaah"
i can go along with the rest of your post (ie. "you get what you pay for"), but this is pretty obtuse. so the whole internet should only support IE? why not throw out the whole http, tcp/ip, et al, spec and let microsoft rewrite them?
this is like telling me i can't take my motorbike on the road since >1% of vehicles on the road are bikes. . .
mr c
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - R. Feynman
GoDaddy is not blaming Apple, the article is inaccurate.
That'll show them, let them keep their darn money!
It seems to me that GoDaddy takes advantage of people who have little technical knowledge, and tries to push them to buy services they don't need.
Sometimes GoDaddy web pages are so full of ads for dubious services that it is difficult to find the useful content.
You can grab nightly builds of Safari here:
http://nightly.webkit.org/builds/
It's still Apple, but they've moved the CVS to a more public area. Aside from one person (Anders Carlsson) everyone working on Safari and WebKit are Apple employees.
Define an agile browser, please.
:p
Opera
Define an agile person, please.
Dictionary.com says:
Characterized by quickness, lightness, and ease of movement
I say "Simply the best internet experience."
Statistics
Safari is the #3 most popular web browser behind Internet Explorer and Firefox, according to whoever these guys are. It's also the #1 browser on the #2 desktop OS. To ignore Safari is to embrace Microsoft's monopoly. Most of us here on Slashdot aren't particularly happy with that idea.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Comment removed based on user account deletion
No, he was talking about Opera, the web browser. Is there another definition? That can't be right.
The best definition in this case would be understood by experience. But not the kind of experience offered by Opera.
If you have access to a Linux, *BSD, Solaris, or some such UNIX system, install KDE. Then give Konqueror a try. It's the quickest browser around. It's got amazingly fast responsiveness, and the minimum of bloat necessary for a full-blown web browser.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
This isn't an option for a lot of people because cheap hosts and the free webspace that you get with ISP accounts etc don't usually allow you to configure them to respond to other hostnames.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
Here's their email support form
Enjoy
-tom
Well, you've heard of it, and that's a good start. But, I would really suggest trying before knocking. No one who has given Opera a fair shot would say this. Most people just see all the features and assume it's an acceptable indicator of bloat, which is just not true.
You're absolutely right. I was really annoyed at the way they treat customers. You have to buy credits to get features that many hosting services provide for free. Their website is like a carnival where you have to pay for every ride and not like an amusement park where you pay admission. When my domains are up for renewal I'm switching. I've always preferred amusement parks and I am happier paying a few dollars extra for a quality hosting service.
Point taken. But I guess you get what you pay for. I assume that this GoDaddy is cheap?
-- There are two kinds of motorcycles. 1: German. 2: Crap.
yeah that was a short sighted statement, i'll concede the point.
"Define an agile browser, please."
'Out-of-the-box', Opera has a lot more going for it than FireFox. I could see somebody thinking of it that way when describing Opera as more agile. Unfortunately, I don't think FF fans realize just how snazzy Opera's UI is and I don't think Opera fans realize just how extensible FF is. In your shoes, I wouldn't recommend taking too much offense to that comment.
"Derp de derp."
You've got bigger problems than that, my friend - someone who claims to love you keeps trying to dress you in gap clothes
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
"i don't know." ...
you know, they say that there's truth in advertising. ;)
Recently, I needed to register a couple of domain names. While Go Daddy was the cheapest by $2 or $3/yr, their abominable web site was enough to drive me to name.com. Anyone who designs a cluttered, in-your-face web site like GoDaddy's probably has no clue about web development. I figured that it was only a matter of time before compatibility failed with such a poor design.
Case 1: /?ABCDEFGH
[canterbury:~] gjh% telnet forgreatergood.org 80
Trying 64.202.167.129...
Connected to forgreatergood.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 302 Moved Temporarily
Content-Length: 0
Location:
Connection closed by foreign host.
Case 2:
....(message text)
[canterbury:~] gjh% telnet forgreatergood.org 80
Trying 64.202.167.129...
Connected to forgreatergood.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
Host: forgreatergood.org
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 01:15:53 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.31 (Unix) mod_pointer/0.8 PHP/4.4.1
X-Redirected-By: mod_pointer - http://stderr.net/mod_pointer/
Location: http://www.wavepulse.net/forgreatergood
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
The only difference was that with Case 2, I pasted in the request lines atomically, whereas in Case 1, I typed it line by line.
This is probably down to a brain dead content-switching device looking packet by packet instead of reassembling the stream. It is broken.
Greg
I'm an admitted Mac Zealot, and I host on GoDaddy. I actually like their services. Extremely inexpensive registrar, with cheap hosting, and I get all the Open Source toys I can't host myself off my shitty Verizon DSL at home because they block Port 80. Not that a redirect isn't feasible, but at the point at which I'm paying for dynamic DNS (free service isn't stable enough for my needs) for a few dollars more I get Mambo, PHP Collab, and a lot of other useful packages. Plus CGI, 25 MySQL databases, Javascript, and for a small fee ColdFusion.
I tried Blue Domino and Register, and everything is either pay as you go or does not support standards. Godaddy is pay as you go, but they set the bar high with the base level of service and are reasonable in terms of the next level of service.
When I move my sites to REAL production, of course a hosted/virtual dedicated through someone "enterprise" ready is a no brainer, but for cheaper clients/small storefronts/hobbyist or small biz sites, GoDaddy makes my life simple... I don't need to hire a full time SuperSysAdmin to roll me a server to do a simple site, and can outsource the heavy server configurations to my go-to developers when client business and dollars warrant it.
Something tells me that the developers who worked on this haven't even heard of RFC 2616.
Look, the whole point of the RFCs is that there are commonly accepted standards. If they aren't complying, then why on EARTH would you want to accomodate them? This shows that goDaddy didn't do an adequate job of testing, otherwise this would have shown up before they deployed it. You cannot 'outsource' testing to your vendors, that's a job you should be doing yourself. Back in the day, we even tested using AOL's browser, even though the clueful subscribers used the real deal. Now, I always put an RFC compliance clause in my vendor contracts, otherwise you could be forced to pay for crap. Even ICANN does that http://www.icann.org/cctlds/au/proposed-sponsorshi p-agmt-04sep01.htm
(Appendix F, section 3)
Next, they'll violate an RFC that is 'more' important. What will you do then?
Well yes, GoDaddy is cheap, but this particular limitation is a limitation of the hosting provider, not the DNS provider. You can fiddle around with DNS records as much as you please, but if your hosting provider won't send your files because it doesn't understand that they belong to a particular hostname, it won't do any good whatsoever.
In your case, it sounds like you either configured your server to listen for your hostname, or you had a dedicated IP address. This isn't what most people who have bog-standard hosting accounts have available to them. In the most common case, virtual hosting, several websites share the same IP address, so the server needs to look at the Host header provided by the web browser to determine which website is being accessed. Low-quality hosts don't offer any facility to reconfigure this with new hostnames, so even if your DNS provider is correctly telling people that www.example.com points to the right server, the server won't know how to respond, because it doesn't know anything about www.example.com, only www.myisp.com/~username or whatever.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
Windows users are as full of affectation as anybody! Pshaw!
GoDaddy's founder, Bob Parsons, apparently loves the idea of torture. Bleah. Using them is kind of like giving money to the Chinese government. I think spending money at more socially conscientious companies is a better idea.
They can load-balance at so many levels (like DNS, TCP/IP, Application level, etc.) that this would be a ridiculous scheme to do so.
It seems like whoever implemented this was trying to do some silly IP logging scheme. (Which is just as ridiculous.) S/he must have not known how to grab IPs from the initial web request.
This is old and inaccurate information based on text from his blog that was taken entirely out of context. Move along, nothing to see here.
0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
Heh, maybe it's Sun's fault ;-) Anyway those with problems should drop back a Java version.
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
Really? You honestly perfer Opera?
Other than the ability to remember when you had open when you last closed it I found Opera to be very cold. The feel of it was very sterile and "clean". It just felt wrong to me.. maybe it's because I'm so used to FF but Opera just felt too "iPod" if that makes sense.
I like muppets.
Let's make history and mod someone down after he asked for it.
"BUT MY 0.25% of the market share browser doesn't work flawlessly, waaaaaaah"
Wait. Which browser is the only one to pass Acid2? Oh, that's right, Safari!
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
Has the GoDaddy babe turned her back on Safari and Opera?
Now why anyone would want to go to the site in the first place, I have no idea.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
I used it exclusively for two days. It's easily the worst web browser I've ever used, requiring bizarre configuration gymnastics to get the toolbars set up how I like them, limited mouse gesture support, locking up randomly and leaking memory, and full of annoying bugs like failing to trap Ctrl+L if the cursor is inside a text input box.
I am sure people have good reason to get angry about their vendor if stuff like this happens. However, the poster is right in saying that you get what you pay for. If you are the type that thinks he can cut corners and believe the glossy advertising, than you cannot really complain to slashdotters about it.
If you want a good service just use easydns http://www.easydns.com./ They only do DNS and therefore actually know what they are doing.
Try going to the linked Apple Support discussion board page and looking at this message timestamped Dec 7, 2005 3:32 PM:
I just wrote and received the following response from Godaddy:
"Response from WILLIAM G
12/07/2005 04:23 PM
Dear Matthew Wanderer
Thank you for contacting Customer Support.
Apple recently released an update to Java, Version J2SE 5.0. There is a bug in this release that has caused forwarding to stop working properly for both the browsers Safari and Opera on Mac OS X. You will need to report this bug to Apple Computers using the Report Bugs feature from within the Safari menu. This situation was caused by changes in Java and not GoDaddy. Because of that a resolution is completely out of our hands. I apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause.
Please let us know if we can help you in any other way."
They claim it's the Java update, which is what I thought it might be in my initial post. Frustrating is just the beginning here because I quite sure Apple will pass the buck as well, and why wouldn't they.
That's actually an IIS "feature". Hotmail did the same for years: it would return a 302 response as soon as the connection was open.
Now I am sure you didn't try Opera, most likely you accidentally tried Oprah, it's a common mistake.
I went with godaddy not because they were cheap but because they were the only company that I had heard of that offered privacy at the time. Now more big name companies are adding domain privacy, like yahoo for example.
I've had problems with godaddy before, no need to go into detail, and would be interested in going somewhere else. I don't want to move over to yahoo and then read hundreds of comments next week on here saying how bad they are. Can anyone recommend a company that is [b]well established[/b] and offers private domains?
Could someone using one of the affected browsers tell me if this site works? www.justoneclubcard.com I'm using godaddy for it :-(
The #2 desktop OS is Linux, I'm afraid (with about 3x more users than OSX). And Opera has a much bigger market share than Safari, even on the desktop (and that's not counting just about every single cellphone out there - Opera has more than 80% of that market). Remember that Opera defaults to identifying itself as MSIE, to work on "MSIE-only sites". If a script spcifically looks for it, though, it will identify it as Opera (on the servers I manage, about 6% of hits are from Opera browsers).
just fine, and Sam Spade doesn't have a problem using HTTP 1.1:
...
12/08/05 21:38:34 Browsing http://www.photosparks.com/
Fetching http://www.photosparks.com/
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.photosparks.com
Connection: close
User-Agent: Sam Spade 1.14
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 02:38:34 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.31 (Unix) mod_pointer/0.8 PHP/4.4.1
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.4.1
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html
ee
Sparks Photography
0
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
You can always use Safari Enhancer on versiontracker. It turns off the cache, and allows it to spoof it's user-agent.
/ 17776
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx
You forgot to capitalize 'HTTP/1.1' in the request line. You didn't include a 'host:' field. Those alone are reason enough for a webserver to give you unpredictable results, given that the site is probably a virtual host on that IP.
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
Another way to put it: Opera's smaller than Firefox, yet has about as much features, give or take, as Seamonkey.
Posted using Opera 8.51, build 7712.
And the JRE version is just a red-herring.
30s of investigation on my park shows that their HTTP header parsing is fux0red. The biggest problem IMNSHO is that they are *not* looking for the end of the HTTP header, they are looking for the end of the FIRST PACKET.
This will break any HTTP client which uses multiple write()s to the socket while constructing its query, and either takes too long for Nagle, has the Nagle Algorithm turned off, or constructs a query which exceeds the MTU of any network between itself and GoDaddy.
GoDaddy is badly broken. The programmer who wrote the redirect code DID NOT read Stevens UNP or TCP/IP Illustrated Volume I.
The JRE "fix" is probably just a default state change of Nagle or the HTTP header contruction code in some fancy-pants object. (I'm a UNIX C hacker, not a Java guy).
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Define an agile browser, please.
An agile browser is one that can perform complex gymnastic manoevres while simultanously rendering web pages.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
I actually heard a year ago that many people dropped Godaddy, because they were serving different/incorrect/empty pages ...
.... good chance that they do not see crap, and your godaddy site goes down the loo...
to crawlers and people's sites were dropping from SE indexes like crazy
dunno, never used them, but since those conplaints by many I did not want to go with them...
Now it makes me wonder what googlebot, msnbot, yahoo and other members of the artificial gang see from these 302/404/no source sites
The current belief is malformed headers, an invalid 302 header with a bogus location and a redirect loop.
That's not it. That's not it by a mile. The real cause of this problem is that GoDaddy never bothered testing their site with anything other than two browsers. Hell, they probably only tested it with IE and the FF users just got lucky.
What the fsck is it with web developers that they never ever test their pages? And what is it with their managers that they don't insist on testing?
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Clearly, these guys are MoCo hacks and Firefox fanboys. This is the insidious arm of the "Spread Firefox" campaign :)
And apache 1.3 no less. This must be a plan to force us all to upgrade to apache 2.0 !!!
Must be a module in apache or something else down the line. Apache 1.3 was rock solid for me for years. With domains from godaddy no less.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
What is your source for this dubious claim? I know NO desktop Linux users. None. I know tons of OS X and Windows users (many of the latter jumping in startling numbers to the former, btw.) And yes, before you attack me personally, I have lots and lots of friends and business associates so my sampling is quite adequate. And don't get me wrong. I love Linux, but I have no doubt that it's not the #2 desktop OS.
Get a better registrar - GoDaddy is a budget problemhouse.
I recommend Joker.com - rock solid, good support, and a near bulletproof TOS.
That goes to here.
Serves a blank page, however - I notice that the favicon still loads. Odd.
I've also noticed that Safari will *not* load the rollover for the 'links' button. Works in every other browser.
Anyone know why?
I have had an ongoing issue with GoDaddy for months where they are blocking my mail server. First they will reply we don't have a ststic IP. I reply with the documentation that we do. Then they will say we are a part of a dial-up pool. I provide the documentation that my ISP does not even have a dialup pool. Everything is static. Then the whole process starts over. My ISP has had the exact same results. Do yourself a favor and stay as far away from this company as possible.
Hmm, my domain http://fretpet.com/ still isn't working. I think your system must have gotten the redirected IP and cached it from some other process. After messing with CURL a few times in Terminal I got my system to start redirecting, but after a day it's back to broken.
-- thinkyhead software and media
If you're looking for a better provider then GoDaddy, I would recommend http://dreamhost.com/. Good service, fair pricing and really generous hosting packages.
Disclaimer: I am not an employee nor affiliated with dreamhost.com. In fact, I work for one of their (and GoDaddy's) competitors.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
I think you're right on the mark. GoDaddy is making excuses. You're either RFC compliant or you're not. It's your responsibility to choose vendors that do what you need them to do.
Then again, you get what you pay for when you use GoDaddy's crappy, CHEAP services. I have no sympathy for people who think that all registrars are the same and therefore the lowest price is all that matters. They're idiots. They should be driving Yugos and eating generic food.
Either they fixed it or you need the domain name.
Trying 64.202.167.129...
Connected to photosparks.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET http://photosparks.com/ http/1.1
HTTP/1.1 302 Moved Temporarily
Content-Length: 0
Location: http://photosparks.com/?ABCDEFGH
"The owner of godaddy seems like a real standup guy"
Wasn't he the one who posted a rabid rant applauding the use of torture? (my apologies if i have the wrong guy)
His TV commercials are also disgustingly sexist. While not related to service, in my book this is not a stand-up guy.
This space available.
It's Cisco's fault.
This is bullshit. Try using the command line lynx or curl browsers... it fails with them and they are not dependent on Java. This is a configuration error on GoDaddy's servers that started around November 28. Before then Lynx, Curl, Safari, and Opera all worked find when interacting with their forwarding service.
A man said to the universe "Sir, I exist!"
That user (and pretty much anyone else who links to playfullyclever) is just a troll trying to slashvertise and drive traffic to his site.
From his own site:
http://www.playfullyclever.com/slashdot.html (link intentionally broken)
Apparently this is his new user -- all of the old ones must have run out of karma when people caught on.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
walmart example:
...
...
.... and don't say that their provider shipped the bad merchandise and go FSCK yourself ...
...
.... and I was overly polite
my local store gives bags (plastic only though) when you buy it, in fact they package everything for you, and they help you to carry stuff to your car (tip of $0.025-0.5 is welcomed and expected)
they are more expensive
the other one (i prefer not to go to) is cheaper. you have to pay an extra for bags, and then carry it
now Godaddy is none of them, not even Walmart: when they sell a rotten bottle of cucumber, or meat with shitflies stuck to it they exchange it with big apologies
because that is what they are doing now
you pay for a service, than some customers do not see your page (maybe even crawlers), then the service is a rotten bottle of cucumber
Breaking News:
Google said they would fix this problem in Safari & Opera, just like they fixed the IE problem last week.
These kinds of problems (in addition to security) are why I always recommend that people use a registrar that is not MS Windows based and has good phone support. We have never had any of these kinds of problems with ours.
InetAddresses.net
It is Linux and BSD (Unix) based, has 24 hour toll free phone support, the best domain management control panel interface, and the most free features of any registrar we have used.
As soon as we saw that godaddy ran on the most insecure platform available, we steered clear of them a long time ago. I also don't like having to constantly worry about every one of the thousands of viruses for Microsoft bringing down our domains.
Also, steer clear of Network solutions/Verisign.
Did you really offer up your photography site to be /.'ed? :)
I'd hate to pay your hosting bill next month
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
Actually, apparently GoDaddy is blaming apple. At least, their tech support group doesn't have their story straight.
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170621&Quite secure! Anybody seeing the request header could have full access to a GoDaddy account - and take over any domain registered there.
This is quite possibly the most broken web server ever written in the entire history of computing....
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Unfortunately, it's not a problem that can be fixed until this unnamed vendor provides a patch.
BULLSHIT!
That's just a dumbass way of saying "We made a change without testing it in advance, and with no plans on how to back it out if it didn't work."
Having worked for a creditcard company... this has to do with subscription charges.
Most likely GoDaddy did mention it would be renewed somewhere in fine print when you originally signed up. For recurring charges, the creditcard company has no way to prevent the new charges from going through because it's a "contract" with that merchant.
For example, even if you CLOSE your account, a monthly subscription charge from AOL or a magazine will still go through and post to your creditcard. Even if you are past due or overlimit, it will post. Even if that account number was reported lost or stolen, it will still go through (and then usually get transferred to your new account number).
The only way to stop the charges is to cancel the charges with the merchant... then you can dispute whatever charges did get posted already, with your creditcard company (if the merchant doesnt agree to refund them for you).
This is how it is for every creditcard out there, and when people find out it works this way, they always blame their current creditcard company or the merchant.
"The #2 desktop OS is Linux, I'm afraid (with about 3x more users than OSX). And Opera has a much bigger market share than Safari, even on the desktop."
ok is it just me but i tried loading it in safari then opened it in firefox and then tried again in safari and it worked fine after i tried in safari again
WTF
(yes i know i suck at spelling fell free to correct my grammar and/or spellin i dont care, im still not going to change
Off-topic, but does anyone else get a circular redirect when going to http://www.novell.com/? Linux/Firefox here...
I transferred my domain from NetSol to GoDaddy a few months ago and their form validation in the checkout process was IE-specific. Ew!
honnold.org - sometimes-rock band, all the time awesome forum
Dr. Crichton, the US Senate would love to hear your views on the subject.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The owner of GoDaddy, Bob Parsons, is a freak anyway, so maybe it's time for Opera/Safari users to get a new registrar. And everyone else too. I kept getting US military propaganda spam from GoDaddy to my hostmaster account (Parsons is an ex-marine), and complained. Parsons replied personally, defending his propaganda spamming, and refusing to stop. I get enough spam without my registrar getting into the act too. Goodbye Godaddy.
And how hard can it be for them to fix their damn pages so they work with every browser? Just about every other site in the world manages... They should stop trying to sell us the war and spend their time fixing their site.
[stupid formatting due to the lameness (of the lameness) filter]
i nes,Romania,Singapore,Vietnam,
Maybe this is a good place to vent about godaddy blocking one third of the world.
Given the fact that godaddy is the third (or second ?) registrar in terms of sheer number of registered domains I think this is worse than the great firewall of China.
I submitted a story last year but it was ignored. Blocking is not as in "not accepting credit cards from Nigeria" but as in "we block them in the firewall".
So you can't receive mail, or visitors from the "blocked part of the world" if you have a domain hosted with godaddy.
Of course this is highly dependant on how the DNS and mail relay are set up for the sender (gmail users are not affected for example).
But this is not all. You can't even access godaddy from there. And the list is not fixed, like China, Nigeria and we're done with it.
In 2004 they added countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Indonesia, Malaysia where they had paying customers !
So people and businesses from those countries (who paid in advance sometimes for 3-5 years) lost
service (they could not send mail, edit their pages if they're hosted with godaddy - paid hosting) and
they were unreaceable for their (local) friends and customers.
AND they could not even log to godaddy to disable the recurrent billing !
This is not some local DNS/network fluke but it is backed up by official statements from godaddy. The list of blocked countries (as of 2004) was:
Bulgaria,China (incl. Hong Kong),Indonesia,Malaysia,Nigeria,Pakistan,Philipp
Cuba
Iran
Iraq
Libya
North Korea
Sudan
Syria
I did not follow on this story (moved the domains away from godaddy) so I don't know if it's over yet but this was going on already for more than one year.
Maybe I missed something but the second time it comes back to / it doesn't get a 302, it's given a 200 OK:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:42:58 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.31 (Unix) mod_pointer/0.8 PHP/4.4.1
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.4.1
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html
So it's server side, the browser isn't preventing looping, its serving up the page it's given with is empty.
Getting bad code to work. Personally, that sounds like a really bad feature to me, but, there it is.
Ahem, so does Konqueror. And people seem to care even less about supporting it. (see e.g. google maps)
I am trolling
hehe. Customers screaming, reputation going through the floor and they're sitting about waiting for someone else to fix the problem...
Deleted
I also prefer Opera by a very wide margin; I've been using it for maybe 7 or 8 years now. This is the first time I'm running Firefox in months; I installed it to see what the hype was about. If you think Opera is too 'clean' and 'sterile', I guess it's because I like clean and sterile and don't need the warm and fuzzy web browser you do, just like I don't need all the eye candy that's in KDE. There's no faster browser, with better graphics resizing, with built-in options so that when I upgrade I don't break all the settings I've already tweaked, nevermind all the extensions Firefox has that have more options than I want/need and are written by too many different people who all use different wording to say the same thing so have to spend time trying to figure out what they mean and what to enable/disable but only after I restart Firefox every time I install an extension.
Overall, Firefox reminds me too much of Windows applications and Windows limitations, and I compare its requiring a restart to the rebooting and application restarts required with setting changes on a Windows machine. Maybe you're a Windows user so that stuff seems normal and natural. No, thanks. I prefer a fast, clean web browser with options that can be overridden in a second.
And that session restore Opera has rocks!
What is this GoDaddy website and does it really matter if it doesn't work with Opera or Safari?
- Raynet --> .
Godaddy is owned by a NAZI, so this is Yet Another Reason for them to fuck off!
I was about to register a domain with GoDaddy (because it was one of the cheapest). Luckily I went on slashdot first, and will go to another registrar. Does anyone know a good one?
Since when is Java used for any redirect?
As pointed out elsewhere, the problem is clearly down to GoDaddy, and they should fix it instead of making up excuses. People are paying for service from them, and they expect a service that works.
GoDaddy has gone down considerably in my estimation, although given their low price, service probably isn't their number one priority. Again, you pay for what you get.
It seems to me that this situation screams for a class action. I have two domains that are effected by this problem and have had verifiable losses. How about it? Is there an ip enabled attorney who wants to weigh in?
Nice pictures. Congrats to whomever got married.
I think I've managed to wrestle the point you're trying to make from the clutches of this post. I think.
... is cheaper. you have to pay an extra for the bags..." - The "other one" is Wal Mart, right? I jump to this conclusion based on the first line of your post, but I don't know if I'm reading you correctly. Wal Marts charge for bags these days?
That said, either my reading comprehension needs more practice or you are one confusing storyteller! Some points I find confusing:
1. "the other one
2. "now Godaddy is none of them, not even Walmart... - Umm... I think what you mean is GoDaddy is worse than your local store AND worse than Wal Mart but I'm already so confused as to which store in your example is which so I might just be way off here.
3. "bottle of cucumber... - Huh...? er...
Though I'm not sure I am following your analogy correctly, overall I think your point is that GoDaddy sucks, right?
Regardless, any store that sells me cucumbers in a bottle (rotten or not) and then charges me for a bag to put it in won't be getting my business! So yes, they can go FSCK themselves, and I'll tell them right to their faces! Once I figure out who they are.
Very interesting, and makes sense. A good strategy, but still not reassembling multiple packets correctly before redirecting...
-- John
1. No wal mart in costa rica :) it is called "mas por menos", the fisrt is "automercado"
:)
... (and a website you cannot see is a broken service)
... :)
... on the bag issue: in many places in europe they charge you for a bag.
....
... I would prefer if they had recyclled paper though ... i am a treehugger you know :)
....
...
2. no, what I mean is that they are cheap, so they have limited services (just as the "other store")
3. well pickles
What I meant that it is that:
it is one thing to offer less for a smaller price, but whatever the price is you should not sell broken services
now it is OK not to give free bags with your purchase (and have lower prices) , but it is not OK to sell rotten vegetables, or pickles or whatever
HAHA
While it is not convenient, people tend to take bags to the supermarket, and at the end they save money, and do good to the environment
I personally pay more at the store for everything so the bag is paid by at the end
cheers
in europe we had cucumber in a bottle, it is not your traditional pickle, but actual cucumbers with yeast, traditionally made with bread (for the yeast) in Hungary we called them "kovaszos uborka" (which translates to cucumber
The #2 desktop OS is Linux, I'm afraid (with about 3x more users than OSX).
Notice I specifically said desktop OS; I'm not including servers. If you have information to the contrary, cite your source.
If a script spcifically looks for it, though, it will identify it as Opera (on the servers I manage, about 6% of hits are from Opera browsers).
What makes you think they haven't done this You're saying 0.53% of all web surfers use Opera AND have gone out of their way to change their user-agent string so it no longer pretends to be MSIE (thus breaking some web sites)?
Opera makes up 1.472% of hits on my personal home page, but this doesn't account for the various spiders crawling it, so without those I'm sure it's quite a bit higher - which I would expect, since my site is seen by a lot of Slashdotters and others who are much more likely to use Opera than the average population. So I don't doubt your 6% figure, but I do doubt that it's representative. Safari has 2.129% on my site.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
It works in Safari though....
Except Apple is still on Java 1.4.2
You can install 1.5 (which I have) but it still defaults to 1.4.2 unless your app specifically looks for 1.5. And, what would Java have to do with Safari anyway? As far as I know, Safari is written in C++.
InetAddresses.net
I have had registered domains since at least the mid 90's and ended up having one problem or another with every registrar I tried until the last couple of years when I changed to inetaddresses.net.
Here is what I always recommend that people look for.
BSD or Linux is the most common, but even commercial Unix will do.
If they are running this kind of service on a toy platform, that is usually a sign of more problems to come.
You can use netcraft to probe to see what platform they are running on.
Since I'm fighting the same kind of issues, my theory here is this was done by GoDaddy to protect its servers from stupid DoS attacks, or the folks currently trying to spam web log reports with bogus referring URLs for gambling or pharmaceutical product web sites.
/n/r is entered, your telnet session is holding up that thread on what probably is a frontend DoS protection server if my theory is correct - if the firewall sat there and waited for the request to finish (typing an HTTP request by hand is not normal), then that firewall would crash when it had all of its threads tied up with partially received HTTP requests.
The first GET request gets the redirect response with a CGI string ?ABCD[...] appeneded, a real browser will follow that redirect request (albeit perhaps an invalid request). Spiders and most other things will not, or at least not immediately.
Someone *spoofing* an IP address on the request would not get back a response, and therefore be unable to get the real server to return a page and the real server is protected.
When the firewall server sees the redirect request - WITH THE CORRECT CGI TAG - it enables that requesting IP address temporarily so that on the next (3rd) request for / it is a valid request from a real visitor, and the real http server returns the correct 200 response. (this approach would cause issues for AOL users or people behind multiple IP proxy cache servers however)
By changing the value contained in the CGI string, they can invalidate any stored requests, hard coded scripts or brute force attacks.
This would explain why a subsequent request from a different browser from the same IP works the first time without a redirect.
Think outside of the RFC box.
If you take the Broken browser, clear its cache, restart it and try the request again, does it work? That test would sort out whether this is an issue of the caching behavior - or if the later request succeeds because the IP has been validated so the GET request skips the first 2 steps.
Also, regarding the server responding before the second
Final 2006 "Proof of Global Warming" US Hurricane Count -> 0
To everyone who says GoDaddy was not blaming Apple - listen up, your observations were simply wrong.
GoDaddy did not post that particular message on their website and blame a vendor (Cisco) until the evening AFTER this Slashdot story got posted (by me, I'm ZackMac). No Joke. This issue has been occuring since on or around November 25th, 2005. Took them long enough to even admit the problem.
For over two weeks GoDaddy has been doing NOTHING BUT BLAMING APPLE. If you read that Apple forum linked in the article you'll see that everytime anyone asked GoDaddy about resolving the problem, these are the type of response(s) given:
Another one:
And another one...
And another one...
I feel more like I do right now than I did a while ago.
OHHH! Everything makes much more sense now! Especially this part:
:)
:)
well pickles
I get it now... I think I'm going to go hide in the corner in shame now.
Thanks for the clarification.
Safari and Opera aren't related, and if you had read the comments attached to this article, you'd see that the problem occurs on Lynx under Linux, too. That one's text-based and doesn't have *any* connection to either of the above.
"Probably" isn't a suitable argument for the Slashdot crowd - you'll get flamed to shreds if you're not careful... regardless of whether this was GoDaddy's "fault" in the first place, it is most definitely their problem to fix, one way or another.
Telling people they should be using Firefox anyway is like telling a guy stuck in traffic on the freeway that he should have bought a helicopter - people have the right to use whatever browser they damn well like, and as long as the browser behaves how it should (and Opera and Safari do, in this case), it's up to the site operators to make sure *they* stick to standards rather than expecting the browsers to ignore their stupid config errors.
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)