I see the following snippet posted all over the internet:
<a href="itms-services://?action=download-manifest&url=itms-services://?action=download-manifest&url=http:/oursite.com/myApp.plist" id="text">
Kind of hard to believe that is a standard practice. Is there any difference between itms-services://?action=download-manifest&url=itms-services://?action=download-manifest&url= and itms-services://?action=download-manifest&url=?
It's a typo, but it doesn't stop the installs working.
Probably because it forms a url like this:
itms-services://
?
action=download-manifest
&
url=itms-services://?action=download-manifest
&
url=http:/oursite.com/myApp.plist
and it's probably taking the last url.
I just ran both through the Charles Web Proxy and the responses (and requests) are identical. (Ignore the 401's - that is the server requesting authentication).
As you can see they both result in the same request.
But, of course this could change in the future Apple updates.
So stick to the single itms-services version.
Related
I'm developing a Google Sheets add-on. The add-on calls an API. In the API configuration, a url like https://longString-script.googleusercontent.com had to be added to the list of urls allowed to make requests from another domain.
Today, I noticed that this url changed to https://sameLongString-0lu-script.googleusercontent.com.
The url changed about 3 months after development start.
I'm wondering what makes the url to change because it also means a change in configuration in our back-end every time.
EDIT: Thanks for both your responses so far. Helped me understand better how this works but I still don't know if/when/how/why the url is going to change.
Quick update, the changing part of the url was "-1lu" for another user today (but not for me when I was testing). It's quite annoying since we can't use wildcards in the google dev console redirect uri field. Am I supposed to paste a lot of "-xlu" uris with x from 1 to like 10 so I don't have to touch this for a while?
For people coming across this now, we've also just encountered this issue while developing a Google Add-on. We've needed to add multiple origin urls to our oauth client for sign-in, following the longString-#lu-script.googleusercontent.com pattern mentioned by OP.
This is annoying as each url has to be entered separately in the authorized urls field (subdomain or wildcard matching isn't allowed). Also this is pretty fragile since it breaks if Google changes the urls they're hosting our add-on from. Furthermore I wasn't able to find any documentation from Google confirming that these are the script origins.
URLs are managed by the host in various ways. At the most basic level, when you build a web server you decide what to call it and what to call any pages on it. Google and other large content providers with farms of servers and redundant data centers and everything are going to manage it a bit differently, but for your purposes, it will be effectively the same in that ... you need to ask them since they are the hosting provider of your cloud content.
Something that MIGHT be related is that Google rolled out some changes recently dealing with the googleusercontent.com domain and picassa images (or at least was scheduled to do so.) So the google support forums will be the way to go with this question for the freshest answers since the cause of a URL change is usually going to be specific to that moment in time and not something that you necessarily need to worry about changing repeatedly. But again, they are going to need to confirm that it was something related to the recent planned changes... or not. :-)
When you find something out you can update this question in case it is of use to others. Especially, if they tell you that it wasn't a one time thing dealing with a change on their end.
This is more likely related to Changing origin in Same-origin Policy. As discussed:
A page may change its own origin with some limitations. A script can set the value of document.domain to its current domain or a superdomain of its current domain. If it sets it to a superdomain of its current domain, the shorter domain is used for subsequent origin checks.
For example, assume a script in the document at http://store.company.com/dir/other.html executes the following statement:
document.domain = "company.com";
After that statement executes, the page can pass the origin check with http://company.com/dir/page.html
So, as noted:
When using document.domain to allow a subdomain to access its parent securely, you need to set document.domain to the same value in both the parent domain and the subdomain. This is necessary even if doing so is simply setting the parent domain back to its original value. Failure to do this may result in permission errors.
We have realized that this URL http://Keyword:redacted#example.com/ redirects to http://example.com/ when copied and pasted into the browser's address bar.
As far as I understand this might be used in some ftp connections but we have no such use on our website. We are suspecting that we are targeted by an attack and have been warned by Google that we are passing PII (mostly email addresses) in our URL requests to their Google Adsense network. We have not been able to find the source, but we have been warned that the violation is in the form of http://Keyword:redacted#example.com/
How can we stop this from happening?
What URL redirect method we can use to not accept this and return an error message?
FYI I experienced a similar issue for a client website and followed up with Adsense support. The matter was escalated to a specialist team who investigated and determined that flagged violations with the format http://Keyword:redacted#example.com/ will be considered false positives. I'm not sure if this applies to all publishers or was specific to our case, but it might be worth following up with Adsense support.
There is nothing you can do. This is handled entirely by your browser long before it even thinks about "talking" to your server.
That's a strange URL for people to copy/paste into the browser's address bar unless they have been told/trained to do so. Your best bet is to tell them to STOP IT! :-)
I suppose you could look at the HTTP Authorization Headers and report an error if they come in populated... (This would $_SERVER['PHP_AUTH_USER'] in PHP.) I've never looked at these values when the header doesn't request them, so I'm not sure if it would work or not...
The syntax http://abc:def#something.com means you're sending userid='abc', password='def' as basic authentication parameters. Your browser will pull out the userid & password and send them along as authentication information, leaving the url without them.
As Peter Bowers mentioned, you could check the authorization headers and see if they're coming in that way, but you can't stop others from doing it if they want. If it happens a lot then I'd suspect that somewhere there's a web form asking users to enter their user/password and it's getting encoded that way. One way to sleuth it out would be to see if you can identify someone by the userid specified.
Having Keyword:redacted sounds odd. It's possible Google Adsense changed the values to avoid including confidential info.
In one of my MVC3 web applications I have recently noticed some strange looking Urls in the analytics reports.
The Urls look like they have an encoded value injected into the route but seem to match the routes as if the encoded value was not there.
Normal Url
/MyWebsite/Controller/Action
Appears in the logs occasionally as
/MyWebsite/(F(B5l-uGhiwA7p6lMmAdzwc27qHH8p5Kdmy5l3ixub7-meZ315Xm-uOtFl_w8RRdki4pf_yhRysEOVZ93xPV3yxDkn5XhXaY5PLara_kiqFb8BlHDZkzqv6wHgOgMTWgUF0))/Controller/Action
I have tested this on the server and local machine and it resolves to the controller regardless of the presence of the inserted value.
They appear to follow a certain pattern so I tested using other variations
/MyWebsite/(F(anything-here))/Controller/Action
Resolves fine, I can also replace the F with any other letter
/MyWebsite/(A(anything-here))/Controller/Action
However, putting more than 1 letter or other character in place of the F does not resolve
/MyWebsite/(AB(anything-here))/Controller/Action = 404 Error
I thought it may be something to do with Cookieless sessions but the information I have found suggests that this isn't supported in MVC anyway. Does anyone know what this is, or if it is anything to worry about?
EDIT:
Turning off cookies for a local browser, I set the session state to 'Auto Detect' in IIS manager and it gave me a key in the URL that looks strikingly similar to the pattern described above.
When I try to actually log in without Cookies it doesn't seem to work, but perhaps that's another issue.
Setting IIS manager to 'Use Cookies' and accessing using a browser with cookies turned off (I used Opera with option 'Never accept cookies' in Advanced preferences) didn't seem to create the URL as before, but judging by the similarities it must at least explain why it matches the routes.
Since IIS is set to 'Use Cookies' on my server, I'm not sure why the URLs are being generated, but at least I now know what they are. Perhaps this is an attempt at Session hijacking...
This does indeed look like session data stored in the URL. It's a feature of ASP.NET and works just fine with MVC as well. Look in the IIS manager for the Session State icon of your website and it's Cookie Settings Mode is most likely set to Auto Detect. This might cause it to fall back to URI mode in case cookies are not supported.
EDIT
There has been quite a development. The current problem is this:
I compared requests sent from a browser and sent from my app. There have been some differences and I managed to correct most of them. Some are still unfixed, since I haven't figured it out how yet. I am using INDY.
How can i send (or add) cookies into the request?
I tried this:IdHTTP.CookieManager.AddCookie('bakatheme=BrectanTheme',IdHTTP1.URL) but it doesn't work. Also, in INDY help they say that it is supposed to be AddCookie(String, String), but my Delphi only accept (String, TIdURI) - I am not sure if it is the right URI I am calling.
In the Headers I have this code: AcceptEncoding:='gzip,deflate,sdch'; yet when I parse the outgoing request, it states this: AcceptEncoding:gzip,deflate,sdch,identitybut I am certain I don't have "identity" anywhere in the code.
Those are the two things in which my request differs from the browser's. Now, I am getting a 500 Internal Server Error at return, can it be caused by the lack of cookies or the second thing?
Thank you very much.
Haven't exactly tried it myself but here's an example I found about website login using indy
http://www.ciuly.com/delphi/indy/persistent-login-example-for-geocacheing-no-ssl/
Ok. Lets comment:
How can i send (or add) cookies into the request?
You should not do that. Indy handles this for you (but if really want to, there is a TidCookieManager). But it seems to me that you dont know how cookies work. Its not a thing you can add to a request. It cames from the server and it identifies you.
In the Headers I have this code: AcceptEncoding:='gzip,deflate,sdch';
AcceptEnconding tells to the server that it can compact the response using those algorithms. Indy supports gzip,deflate,sdch,identity and indy is updating que header request to add the one you forgot to put.
You should take a look at those links to learn how http works:
W3
Wikipedia
I'm seeking for solution how to isolate widget included by partial to main site. Issue appear when user access site with https. Ie 6,7 shows security confirmation dialog (part of website resources are not in secure zone).
First of all I download twitter widget on our side, also I download all CSS and pictures. Then I patched widget JS to point onto downloaded resources. But still has not luck with security warning :( I guess the reason of this issue is AJAX request to twitter, but there is no idea how to sole it. (Just to create some kind of proxy on our side).
Thank you for attention.
You just need to host the .js file on your server, and link to that. That is all.
The script auto detects SSL and will make requests to https://twitter-widgets.s3.amazonaws.com/ instead of http//widgets.twimg.com/ dynamically depending on your scenario.
Hope that helps!
geedubb
I got the Twitter Widget to work over HTTPS (SSL) by doing the following:
Save every image, css, and javescript file on my local webserver
Changed every "http" to "https" in the javascript AND in the css
The last piece was tricky. https://twitter.com/statuses/user_timeline.json brings back data that already includes "http"; namely avatars and the profile image. So, I found about four places in widjet.js that used the user_timeline.json data. I hardcoded an image url where ever that "http" data was used. Searching "src" will located all of those places.
It's an ugly fix, but it worked.
You can use a sniffer like HttpWatch to debug this--watch the requests going by and see which ones start with http instead of https. It may be possible to just change the urls you use to point to https://twitter.com, not sure about how your widget works.
thanks Keshar, worked for me. I came to the same conclusion that all http requests had to be https to prevent the IE security warning and also display the twitter feed. I used the live HTTP headers firefox plugin which helps for showing any non-secure http requests, such as the JSON requests.
Jon
If you look through the script there are calls to a https site. If you simply replace the protocol/domain with
https://twitter-widgets.s3.amazonaws.com/
instead of
http//widgets.twimg.com/
it works and you don't have to do anything else.