Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Back To The Future (Why logins might fail on Google and others)

A few days ago I got a call from someone that asked for my help.


He said that he can not login into the management section of some site that he is using,
he said that he talked to the technical personal on that site and they said that the problem is not on their side and he also said that he can use his user name and password to login to that site from another machine.

The symptoms on his machine where such that after he entered his username and password he would be sent back to the login page. so I played with it for some time.
I looked for browser hijacking and odd network activity and found none. Eventually I found that if he does not check the "remember me" option he can login and there is no problem.
So I left him sort of happy that he can now use the said system.

The day after I got another call from him saying that now he can not login even to his Google account. I looked at the problem and the browser (IE) was saying that there was a network problem. ping to google works and telnet to port 80 also gave the expected results... Switched over to Google chrome and got a better error message: Redirect loop...

hmmm.... google to the rescue.

It turns out that the date on this machine was set to about 3 months in the future, causing any cookie that was set to a future time (based on the server time of course) to expire immediately.

I reset his machine's date and voila, everything was working.

so next time google does not work for you, make a note of the date and time.

Eyal

Thursday, December 09, 2010

Avoiding timeout during installation of magento

To avoid "Fatal error: Maximum execution time of" just set "max_input_time" in your php.ini,

personally I changed it from 60 (which caused a timeout) to 240 (which worked great).

Sunday, November 14, 2010

How to get a domain authorization code from bulkregister.com

A few months ago I decided that I am gradually going to move away all my registered domains from bulkregister.com to godaddy.com.


Now each time I transfer a domain I am faced with the question of where the hell did they place the authorization code.

so as a service to myself and anyone who might be looking for the same:

1. Log in
2. On the main(gray) toolbar near the top, hover over "Domains" and in the sub menu that opens click "My Domains".
3. Click the name of the domain that you are transferring.
4. The third Setting is "Authorization Info / EPP Key" click the link next to it that says "Email Auth Code to Registrant" and it should reach you inbox.

good luck.



Wednesday, July 28, 2010

empty strings are (not) different then false

Did you know that if you are testing if a value does not equal an empty string in javascript:

v!=''

might return somewhat unexpected results if v is false



var v=false;
alert(v!='')


will alert false and not true as you might expect.
At first glance I said, well o.k. this does make sense because v is a boolean so the empty string is being cast to a boolean for the comparison yielding false.

so I tried


var v=false;
alert(''!=v)


I expected that now the false value of v will be cast to the 'false' string which obviously is not an empty string and that the alert will now show true.

but that does not work either.

finally:

var v=false;
alert(''!=String(v))


does work as expected and results in true being returned.

I wander if this is also the case in ActionScript ...

Monday, July 12, 2010

Beware of javascript String.replace

Here is a problem I encountered a few days ago:

What would you expect the result of the following expression be:

'abc'.replace('b','someUserInput')

Well its easy to guess that it will be the string 'asomeUserInputb', and indeed it will.

however what would happen if instead 'someUserInput' we realy had some some user input?

you would expect it to return the actual user input with 'a' prefixing it and 'c' as its suffix.

I Also guess some of you knew that if instead of 'b' you used a regular expression then some tokens in the replacement string will have a special meaning as in the following table:


Characters  Replacement text
$$ $
$& The matched substring.
$‘The portion of string that precedes the matched substring.
$’The portion of string that follows the matched substring.
$nThe nth capture, where n is a single digit in the range 1 to 9 and $n is not followed by a decimal digit. If n≤m and the nth capture is undefined, use the empty String instead. If n>m, the result is implementation-defined.
$nnThe nnth capture, where nn is a two-digit decimal number in the range 01 to 99. If nn≤m and the nnth capture is undefined, use the empty String instead. If nn>m, theresult is implementation-defined.



What I did not know / expect is for this behavior to occur even when I was using a plain sting as the search value.

In my case I had to do some length based truncation of a user input string, append an ellipsis to it and inject it into a string instead of some place holder.

e.g.
Template string: '<div>$userInputAfterElipsis</div>'
Original User input: 'some long string that said something and a price like 1M$ isideIt'

"luckly" for me, it turned out that the truncation logic truncated the user's input string right after the $ sign and so when I appended an &hellip; (…) to it I ended up with 'some long string that said something and a price like 1M$&helli;' as the new value for the string replacement.
i.e.

'<div>$userInputAfterElipsis</div>'.replace('$userInputAfterElipsis','some long string that said something and a price like 1M$&helli;')

which returns:
'<div>some long string that said something and a price like 1M$userInputAfterElipsishelli;</div>
having replaced the $& in the new value with $userInputAfterElipsis.

so that was the problem. but how should this be resolved? and why should you care?

I will start with the second Q:
You should care because if you use JavaScript you probably also use String.replace and if you do then it might fail to do what you expect in those scenarios where the replacement string is not a fixed string that you know.

As for what can/should be done, well the first thing that comes to mind is that you need to escape those $'s
so how about:
s.replace(original,replacement.replace('$','$$'))
This will not work for two reasons, the first on is that the $ replacement will only replace the first occurrence of a $ sign in the replacement string and the second is that here also the $$ will be interpreted as a single $ so what we do need is actually:
s.replace(original,replacement.replace(/[$]/g,'$$$$'))
now this will work BUT, IMHO, performance-wise it is not such a great solution.

what I ended up doing was using the following:
s.split(original).join(replacement)
this is o.k. as long as you want all the occurrences of original to be replace with replacement. If you want to replace only the first one you should use:
s.replace(original,replacement.replace('$','$$$$'))

As always I hope this will help some one out there in the sea of bits and bytes...

 
Clicky Web Analytics