is this a bug?
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
is this a bug?
I have TB set to use FF for both http and https
I get an email with a link to a website https://xyz.com (not actual site)
the address showing in FF is https://www.xyz.com and I get a security warning that the cert is not valid for https://www.xyz.com
I delete www. and everybody is happy.
So where did the www. come from?
I get an email with a link to a website https://xyz.com (not actual site)
the address showing in FF is https://www.xyz.com and I get a security warning that the cert is not valid for https://www.xyz.com
I delete www. and everybody is happy.
So where did the www. come from?
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: is this a bug?
some certs are valid for the domain but dont include subdomains.
firefox should not redirect to www. from my experience it is a server redirect error.
but i remember that firefox is able to complement addresses.
-> about:config -> browser.fixup.alternate.enabled -> false
firefox should not redirect to www. from my experience it is a server redirect error.
but i remember that firefox is able to complement addresses.
-> about:config -> browser.fixup.alternate.enabled -> false
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
Re: is this a bug?
it isn't a server redirect if I can put the correct URL in FF and it goes there, right?
So are you saying if that item is changed to false it won't put www into the address?
If this happens by default I consider it a bug. It should default to not doing it.
It is giving me a "scare" because of something it is doing not something I did.
So are you saying if that item is changed to false it won't put www into the address?
If this happens by default I consider it a bug. It should default to not doing it.
It is giving me a "scare" because of something it is doing not something I did.
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
Re: is this a bug?
I changed that to false and it is still doing it.
the alt prefix is www. - maybe I should blank it out?
the alt prefix is www. - maybe I should blank it out?
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
Re: is this a bug?
blanked that out and it is still putting www. in
Chrome does not have a problem with it.
If I click on the link in TB it changes it.
If I copy and paste the link into FF it changes it.
If I delete the www. after it changes it, it doesn't change it back and works.
It does the same thing whether those items are changed or not in config.
Chrome does not have a problem with it.
If I click on the link in TB it changes it.
If I copy and paste the link into FF it changes it.
If I delete the www. after it changes it, it doesn't change it back and works.
It does the same thing whether those items are changed or not in config.
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: is this a bug?
pls give the address to confirm!!!
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
Re: is this a bug?
I just did it again with my eyes more open. The original URL isn't the final one. So it is going to a third party who is forwarding it to the intended recipient - IMPROPERLY. Sorry, I will message the vendor.
Thanks
Thanks
- dickvl
- Posts: 54164
- Joined: July 18th, 2005, 3:25 am
Re: is this a bug?
Did you ever try to visit the website with www prefix in Firefox?
Try to use "Forget About This Site" in the history sidebar for this domain to see if that has effect.
Try to use "Forget About This Site" in the history sidebar for this domain to see if that has effect.
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: March 27th, 2004, 3:44 am
Re: is this a bug?
no i did not in FF, I did in Chrome which is why I it may be a FF issue. Chrome deals with it, properly???.
https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage ... 7cdf330645
It is definitely being redirected here in Chrome
https://extremepeptides.com/?mc_cid=e69 ... 7cdf330645
and here in FF
https://www.extremepeptides.com/?mc_cid ... 7cdf330645
https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage ... 7cdf330645
It is definitely being redirected here in Chrome
https://extremepeptides.com/?mc_cid=e69 ... 7cdf330645
and here in FF
https://www.extremepeptides.com/?mc_cid ... 7cdf330645
- therube
- Posts: 21722
- Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: is this a bug?
> I get an email with a link to a website https://xyz.com
So you're clicking this link, in TB, & it is opening up in FF?
> the address showing in FF is https://www.xyz.com
And the link, when clicked in TB, in FF, it (attempts) to load www.xyz.com rather then just xyz.com?
Does TB "obscure" links?
Did you check the source in TB to see what it shows, www.xyz.com vs xyz.com?
Do you have any extensions that may be affecting what you are seeing?
If you disable all FF (& TB, I suppose) extensions, does the same happen?
Safe Mode
So you're clicking this link, in TB, & it is opening up in FF?
> the address showing in FF is https://www.xyz.com
And the link, when clicked in TB, in FF, it (attempts) to load www.xyz.com rather then just xyz.com?
Does TB "obscure" links?
Did you check the source in TB to see what it shows, www.xyz.com vs xyz.com?
Do you have any extensions that may be affecting what you are seeing?
If you disable all FF (& TB, I suppose) extensions, does the same happen?
Safe Mode
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: is this a bug?
your examples point iut server error - admin is stupid.
its not firefo redirecting to www. - its the server.
chrome behaves other because it uses (in your case) the windows cert store - which is also used by edge or internet explorer.
to see what the server response you need to open the network inspector in firefox.
https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage ... 7cdf330645
is a method GET request and response is "302 moved" and server answers with http://www.extremepeptides.com
in one point you are right - chrome haves different. chrome receives a "200 ok"
and this is not the first time i saw this. i know that the difference is caused by server, but i can not tell you why.
its not firefo redirecting to www. - its the server.
thats what i told you above, there is nothing you can do.the cert is only valid for extremepeptides.com.
chrome behaves other because it uses (in your case) the windows cert store - which is also used by edge or internet explorer.
to see what the server response you need to open the network inspector in firefox.
https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage ... 7cdf330645
is a method GET request and response is "302 moved" and server answers with http://www.extremepeptides.com
in one point you are right - chrome haves different. chrome receives a "200 ok"
and this is not the first time i saw this. i know that the difference is caused by server, but i can not tell you why.
- therube
- Posts: 21722
- Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: is this a bug?
While it may be the server that is redirecting, if the source URI is name.com, you would expect (?) that to be attempted to be opened (on the FF end) rather then www.name.com (if that is what is happening).
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
-
- Posts: 913
- Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am
Re: is this a bug?
Google is your friend. Browsers have added "www" for five or six years.
Try it yourself. Type an address in the bar without "www".
Try it yourself. Type an address in the bar without "www".
- therube
- Posts: 21722
- Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: is this a bug?
Browsers (Location bar, actually) have the option to "auto-complete" URLs by adding www. (& .com) - if necessary.
But that does not mean that a name.com link "sent" from another application should change to www.name.com - in particular if name.com is valid (as is the case here).
Also note that: https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage.com/ <> https://extremepeptides.com/.
One is a (general) "marketing" company, the other a company that sells "drugs" (if it is not spam altogether).
But that does not mean that a name.com link "sent" from another application should change to www.name.com - in particular if name.com is valid (as is the case here).
Also note that: https://extremepeptides.us2.list-manage.com/ <> https://extremepeptides.com/.
One is a (general) "marketing" company, the other a company that sells "drugs" (if it is not spam altogether).
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: is this a bug?
thank you @therube - you pointed it out again what i did not see yesterday.
1st is a mailing list, 2nd is website.
website behaves normal - no ssl problem, but the redirect is wrong (for firefox)
1st is a mailing list, 2nd is website.
website behaves normal - no ssl problem, but the redirect is wrong (for firefox)