I want to modify my application URL from //localhost:8080/monitor/index.html to just monitor , so that on putting monitor on browser, my application should open. Is there a way to achieve this, can someone suggest the configuration changes which will be required for this.
Can I map my short URL to the existing one may be somewhere in web.xml. I am not sure about the approach any suggestions will be great.
Thanks and regards
Deb
You're mixing up several different protocol layers in your question.
If you just enter nothing but "monitor" in the browser URL bar the browser is going to first lookup "monitor" in DNS and finding nothing it will then probably send a query to Google or your configured search engine. In the past browsers have taken other steps, such as appending ".com" and prepending "www." but I don't think modern browsers do that any more.
So far, your server is not even remotely involved.
If you're a large ISP user (TimeWarner, Comcast) and use their DNS it's also possible the ISP will intercept your failed DNS lookup and route the request to a "helpful" search page (i.e. SPAM) of their own.
At this point the request is still nowhere near your server.
I suppose you could mess with the /etc/hosts file on your local system to resolve "monitor" to the proper hostname, but that's an extremely brittle solution that has to be hard coded on each machine you want to have this "shortcut" link (and which breaks when the hostname changes).
You're much better off just setting up a web shortcut in your browser that points to the right place.
Related
I recently set up a subdomain on my website with the intention to soon clone my website for testing purposes. Subdomain was "beta", so beta.example.com
It was set up and password protected via htaccess and is directed through Cloudflare, it's about three days old and was never announced publicly (only I know of it).
Today I notice this on my Apache Server Stats page:
Also, CPU load was increasing and very, very high. Upon refreshing, this continued and is actually still continuing right now. Is this some sort of botting/brute force attack? I can't imagine how/why else so many IPs would be accessing this unlinked/private subdomain. I've since taken it down from Cloudflare DNS and the IPs are still connecting somehow, I assume it will take time for it to propagate.
Is this malicious? And how can it be prevented? I assume it was/is attempting to brute force the htaccess password? Is it because it's a common subdomain name? ("beta") - would it matter? Again, it's only been about three days so damn they work fast.
It can be search engine robots, It can be script kiddies, It can be brute force, you can have more information in your log file or by analyzing IP address.
I'm not sure to really understand your problem and what you want.
If you website is online, so yes some people/bots/robots will try to access to it, like any other website.
If you don't want than anybody access to your website, you can add an IP restriction.
I am currently hosting the contents of a site with ProviderA. I have a domain registered with ProviderB. I want users to access the contents (www.providerA.com/sub/content) by visiting www.providerB.com. A domain forward is easy enough and works as intended, however, unless I embed the site in a frame (which is a big no-no), the actual URL reads www.providerA.com/sub/content despite the user inputting www.providerB.com.
I really need a solution for this. A domain masking without the use of a frame. I'm sure this has been done before. An .htaccess domain rewrite?
Your help would be hugely appreciated! I'm going nuts trying to find a solution.
For Apache
Usual way: setup mod_proxy. The apache on providerB becomes a client to providerA's apache. It gets the content and sends it back to the client.
But looks like you only have .htaccess. So no proxy, you need full configuration access for that.
So you cannot, see: How to set up proxy in .htaccess
If you have PHP on providerB
Setup a proxy written in PHP. All requests to providerB are intercepted by that PHP proxy. It gets the content from providerA and sends it back. So it does the same thing as the Apache module. However, depending on the quality of the implementation, it might fail on some requests, types, sizes, timeouts, ...
Search for "php proxy" on the web, you will see a couple available on GitHub and others. YMMV as to how difficult it is to setup, and the reliability.
No PHP but some other server side language
Obviously that could be done in another language, I checked PHP because that is what I use the most.
The best solution would be to transfer the content to providerB :-)
Excuse the potential noobishness of the question, but I'm, well, a bit of a noob when it comes to this domain architecture lark. If "domain architecture" is even the technical term. Anyway, I digress...
So, I've googled this question , but I can't see the answer I'm looking for (maybe it doesn't exist, who knows!?) The situation is that I host a .com top level domain which does a 301 forward to another site on the net not hosted by me. Can I set up a subdomain that then points somewhere else whether that be on my host itself or just some other site elsewhere on the net?
Essentially, if I set up a subdomain, will it too inherit the web forwarding, and if so, can I directly affect where that subdomain points?
Any answers gratefully appreciated!
Before I try to answer your question, let me be a little fussy :)
First thing first you are confusing and mixing together two different protocols ([DNS] and [HTTP]), actually there is even a dedicated page to the Wikipedia for HTTP 301 responses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_301 (but you should read the whole shebang: ([Wikipedia, search for HTTP] is always a good start, and the [RFC 2616] is absolutely a must, IETF RFCs are not easy reading but the Internet is built on them).
DNS is used to translate a name, like www.example.com into an IP address, like 192.168.0.1, in order to locate a machine on the Internet. So DNS is involved as the one of the very first steps a browser takes in order to resolve an URL: but once the "machine name" is translated by the separate DNS Service, and it has become an IP address, DNS job is over and it is used/involved no more.
Then when a browser, using HTTP, contacts the Web Server located on that machine (in this example the machine www.example.com, which the DNS Service has kindly translated to an IP address, in our example 192.168.0.1, because the operating system can only use an IP address as the argument for an [internet socket]) and only at that moment the web server, instead of serving a page, answers whith an "error" code (which, actually is a "response header" with a numeric code that does not start with "2").
Only that this error code is actually used to tell something else: that the browser should try again an "HTTP request", this time connecting to another machine (and, as long as this redirection is "permanent" instead of "temporary" ([HTTP_307]), the new address should be remembered by the browser, its cache and history).
So, if you can setup [redirection response header] on the first machine, it means that there is a Web Server on that first machine that is programmed (given a certain URL pattern) to spit out a Redirection Header, and as long as you can control these redirections, you can as well send the browser wherever you want, not merely sending them to another machine on the Internet but to another URL as well, even on the same website (actually this is the original intended use of code 301, as a measure against [link rot]).
Basically you are free to do whatever you want, or better, to send them wherever you want.
The pros are obvious... the cons are that you must have control over the first web server, and that the visiting browsers will have to perform two "GET request" in order to land at the intended page (this is not grim as it looks, since the [RFC 2616] suggests that the browser (they call it User Agent) caches and remembers the redirection (because it is
permanent)).
Disclaimer: I am being prevented to post hyperlinks, but they where basically all from the Wikipedia so, if you will, you can look the words in brackets "[...]" on the Wikipedia...
I am trying to achieve the following:
when a user types "print" (or "http://print") in the address-bar of the browser :
I want the user to be re-directed to a page : www.abc.com/print/
How can one achieve this ? I tried to lookup some squid configurations but was unable to find the same.
Thanks!
Edit : I do not understand the deal with down votes, this is a perfectly valid question.
If you want to enable a user on your LAN to type "print" in the address bar and be redirected to a given hostname, you'll have to supply a DNS record to that effect. This is not accomplished on a web server, nor is it web development in any respect.
There are several methods to resolving a given hostname to a given IP or to another hostname. One way is to edit the client hosts file, as described in another answer. One could also, if you have a DNS server running within your LAN environment, add A records to this effect.
You must understand how hostname lookups work from a browser. When you type something in the address bar, your browser uses your operating system to resolve the hostname to an IP address. Your operating system uses its hosts file, internet connection, and other mechanisms to accomplish this. This process itself has several tiers and steps that are outside the scope of the browser and which cannot be influenced by the browser. Nor will arbitrary web servers be consulted in this process. Your aim is to inject something in this process that resolves the hostname "print" to the webserver of your choosing - THEN web development might come in to play.
See: http://www.quackit.com/how-websites-work/how-dns-works.cfm
I have an ssl page that also downloads an avatar from a non-ssl site. Is there anything i can do to isolate that content so that the browser does not warn user of mixed content?
Just an idea - either:
try to use an ssl url on the avatar website, if necessary by editing whatever JS/PHP/... script they provide, or:
use your scripting language of choice to grab a copy of the avatar and store it on your server, then serve it from there.
There are a number of good security reasons for the browser to warn about this situation, and attempting to directly bypass it is only likely to set off more red flags.
Ninefingers' suggestions are good, and I would suggest a third option: you can proxy the content directly through your own server using a simple binary retrieve/transmit script, if it changes frequently and is unsuitable for caching.
If all the content you want to include from foreign sites comes from a specific server and path (i.e. http://other.guy/avatar/*) you could use mod_proxy to create a reverse proxy which makes https://your.site/avatar_proxy/{xyz} mirror http://other.guy/avatar/{xyz} .This will increase your bandwidth usage and probably slow things down.