What the hell web browser is this idiot using?
-
I don't recognize that chrome.
-
@Weng Looks like Opera.
-
@asdf That still exists? For fucks sake.
-
@Weng The current version of it is like a good version of Chrome.
-
@hungrier said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@Weng The current version of it is like a good version of Chrome.
Don't care, its not Chrome, so I'm not supporting it.
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Don't care, its not
ChromeInternet Explorer 5, so I'm not supporting it.
-
@Weng It's literally Chromium 56 with a different interface.
If your site breaks on Opera it will break on Chrome.
Except it has built in adblock, which is enabled in the pic but hasn't blocked anything.
-
@groo said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Don't care, its not
ChromeInternet Explorer 5, so I'm not supporting it.Ha. Our official corporate browser actually is latest Chrome.
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@groo said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Don't care, its not
ChromeInternet Explorer 5, so I'm not supporting it.Ha. Our official corporate browser actually is latest Chrome.
Except Chrome does NTLM authentication just fine. This isn't even trying.
-
@Weng log the fucking UA FFS ... it is like primary school for web development.
-
@lucas1 I'm guessing it's a screenshot in a ticket, not a server log he's looking at.
-
@hungrier UA isn't on the server and it BTW it is Opera after they used Webkit.
-
@lucas1 UA isn't in the screenshot either
-
@hungrier I was saying that he should record it as part of each request.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@hungrier I was saying that he should record it as part of each request.
Which would help how, exactly, in this situation?
-
@sloosecannon It would help in future situations. I also told him the browser btw.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon It would help in future situations. I also told him the browser btw.
How?
All it will tell him is that a certain browser has accessed the website. Doesn't help with identifying the browser in a user's screenshot...
Also, I'm pretty sure they're logging requests already.
-
@sloosecannon It won't tell him that specific browser problem but it will help him indentify future ones. You are such a fucking idiot.
BTW the browser is Opera after they moved to webkit / blink rendering engine.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
but it will help him indentify future ones
HOW
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
but it will help him indentify future ones
HOW
Magix
-
@sloosecannon Because you can log the errors via a handler in .NET
In traditional .NET applications it is this in the Global.ascx:
Application_Error(Object Sender, EventArgs e) } { //error handling code }
I am sure there are other equivalents in other langauges like Python with Flask.
http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/0.12/patterns/errorpages/
So you just write to the DB or a log file, along with the request details you need.
On client side errors:
If you wanna log a JS error you would do the following.
window.error = function () { //ajax request to server with relevant details. }
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
but it will help him indentify future ones
HOW
Put an error code on the error page which identifies the user's session.
-
@xaade Apparently @sloosecannon doesn't know there are browser and server side information that can be used to capture this information.
Therefore it is "Magic".
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@xaade Apparently @sloosecannon doesn't know there are browser and server side information that can be used to capture this information.
Therefore it is "Magic".
Apparently @lucas1 doesn't know there are no information that can be gleaned from a screenshot like that to capture this information.
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@xaade Apparently @sloosecannon doesn't know there are browser and server side information that can be used to capture this information.
Therefore it is "Magic".
Apparently @lucas1 doesn't know there are no information that can be gleaned from a screenshot like that to capture this information.
Unless. of course, you do
@anotherusername said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
but it will help him indentify future ones
HOW
Put an error code on the error page which identifies the user's session.
that ^
But by that point, you've eliminated this problem entirely.
-
@sloosecannon I've already said 3 times that this is Opera past Presto days, but apparently you don't read. I also said that what I was suggesting it is to prevent future problems. I said this in my very first post on this subject.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon I've already said 3 times that this is Opera past Presto days, but apparently you don't read. I also said that this was to prevent future problems in my very first post on this subject.
And I've already said it won't prevent future problems, because if all you get is a screenshot, logging the ua isn't gonna give you jack shit.
I'm not sure how you saying it's Opera means I don't read?
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
And I've already said it won't prevent future problems, because if all you get is a screenshot, logging the ua isn't gonna give you jack shit.
If you log the JS error you can match them up if you look at the logs. I worked at large companies and I had to look at the logs for days to identify a problem between the JS and Server side stuff. This stuff isn't ever failproof.
You are either being clueless or you are being disingenous.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
And I've already said it won't prevent future problems, because if all you get is a screenshot, logging the ua isn't gonna give you jack shit.
If you log the JS error you can match them up if you look at the logs. I worked at large companies and I had to look at the logs for days to identify a problem between the JS and Server side stuff. This stuff isn't ever failproof.
You are either being clueless or you are being disingenous.
What on earth makes you think there's a JS error?
-
Bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash. I am fucking not adding fucking logging.
Also, this 403 is coming before it even runs the app code because NTLM/Negotiate authentication out front.
Literally the only requirement is that the browser properly respond with ANY valid domain credentials. Which it clearly isn't. So either the browser is misconfigured, doesn't support NTLM or Negotiate, or the moron isn't on the domain.
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash. I am fucking not adding fucking logging.
Also, this 403 is coming before it even runs the app code because NTLM/Negotiate authentication out front.
Literally the only requirement is that the browser properly respond with ANY valid domain credentials. Which it clearly isn't. So either the browser is misconfigured, doesn't support NTLM or Negotiate, or the moron isn't on the domain.
Apparently. From initial googling, anyways
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:>
Bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash. I am fucking not adding fucking logging.
Intercept the request before it does anything meaninful. You can do this quite easily with .NET.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:>
Bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash. I am fucking not adding fucking logging.
Intercept the request before it does anything meaninful. You can do this quite easily with .NET.
Lol, which part of "bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash" did you not understand?
Especially since, again, logging wouldn't help here.
All it would tell you was "Opera accessed your application at $timestamp"
Unless you have a matching timestamp from the end user to go along with it, or modify the error messages to add some way to link log entries to requests, it's not going to do any good.
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Bullshit unmaintained, unmaintainable legacy trash. I am fucking not adding fucking logging.
Also, this 403 is coming before it even runs the app code because NTLM/Negotiate authentication out front.
Literally the only requirement is that the browser properly respond with ANY valid domain credentials. Which it clearly isn't. So either the browser is misconfigured, doesn't support NTLM or Negotiate, or the moron isn't on the domain.
Just threaten to report them for installing and running unauthorized software...
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Especially since, again, logging wouldn't help here.
It would. Any logging is better than none. You are a fucking idiot.
Also wtf does Legacy mean here? VB6 or .NET3.5?
All it would tell you was "Opera accessed your application at $timestamp"
No you could capture all the session vars, cookie vars easily and you can recreate that through postman or a similar HTTP debugger.
you could capture the Opera version, install it on the VM and try hitting you webservice.
You could capture their IP, their user name and contact the user that was making the request and ask them to help themselves ... etc... etc.... you are so short sighted.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Any logging is better than none.
And also requires man-hours and time to implement, plus red tape to enable.
And of course, this is making the assumption that there is no logging, and that it's not
- @Weng can't get access to the log files or...
- @Weng has access but the logs are useless in this situation, because they're useless in this situation
Or he can post an image to tdwtf and get an answer in a matter of minutes.
-
@Weng said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Also, this 403
...is 401, which is so much fun when coding auth.
One of our common libraries throws 401 when the user isn't in the right role to view the page. That gets apparently intercepted by the OWIN middleware (I think...?) and interpreted as "oh, hey, I guess you aren't logged in? Here's a nickel, kid, go to Microsoft, tell them I sent you and ask for a token". Microsoft's landing page sees the browser, but it also sees the cookie, so it just says "hey, what do you want from me, you're already authenticated, here's your token and go back to where you came from". Which of course leads to the page that threw 401 in the first place.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
Especially since, again, logging wouldn't help here.
It would. Any logging is better than none. You are a fucking idiot.
Also wtf does Legacy mean here? VB6 or .NET3.5?
All it would tell you was "Opera accessed your application at $timestamp"
No you could capture all the session vars, cookie vars easily and you can recreate that through postman or a similar HTTP debugger.
Legacy in this context means "Don't fucking touch it because it'll probably break" and "Politically discontinued and no longer supported except when someone gets a bug up their ass because some random asshole can't access it".
Exactly zero developer-seconds are authorized.
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
And also requires man-hours and time to implement, plus red tape to enable.
LOL 1 line in code in .NET.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
And also requires man-hours and time to implement, plus red tape to enable.
LOL 1 line in code in .NET.
And hours, days even, of red tape.
-
@Weng Problems with you are always@
- "What can I do"?
- "Do this"
- "Can't do this"
- "Try this"
-"Can't do it"
Repeat process until infinity. Get it changed or put the fuck up with it. FFS
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@Weng Problems with you are always@
- "What can I do"?
- "Do this"
- "Can't do this"
- "Try this"
-"Can't do it"
Repeat process until infinity. Get it changed or put the fuck up with it. FFS
WTF
-
@sloosecannon Only if you work in retard world. How am I supposed to suggest changes when they will always be refused. You don't. You get a pair and get a better job.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon Only if you work in retard world. How am I supposed to suggest changes when they will always be refused. You don't. You get a pair and get a better job.
inb4 Blakey I didn't ask for help!
-
@sloosecannon How are you supposed to suggest changes when changes aren't allowed. What I said to do is perfectly reasonable if a web application is getting failures.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@sloosecannon How are you supposed to suggest changes when changes aren't allowed. What I said to do is perfectly reasonable if a web application is getting failures.
He wasn't asking for change suggestions.
He was asking what web browser they were using!
-
@sloosecannon said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
He was asking what web browser they were using!
I heard it was Opera.
-
@sloosecannon And I told him, and then I suggested what he should do to avoid the situation again. Which is a pro-active thing to do.
He will ask another question in the future that can't be solved via "legacy reasons".
-
@loopback0 It was.
-
@lucas1 said in What the hell web browser is this idiot using?:
@loopback0 It was.
I thought it was Opera?