What's up with Mudcat this time!!???

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Feb 05 - 04:43 AM

Are you sure it was that this time Lynne? I am getting in through the front door and I doubt very much that Max would have got up at this time to re-boot a server. He must need sleep...

I've had terrible problems with the Internet over the last couple of day. Vartec my broadband supplier went down several times, some of which I believe was down to a major country wide BT problem.

I use freeuk for a back up dial route in and that has taken me up to 1/2 hour to get a dial in. So that's 2 ISPs who had problems.

It's possible if there were big national Internet problems, it might have been co-incidental timing that allowed one route to work for you but the other not.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,MBSLynne
Date: 22 Feb 05 - 03:47 AM

After managing to stay up, as far as I could tell ALL DAY yesterday, it's gone really early this morning. I tried to get in at 8.15am English time and had to use the back door.

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,MBSLynne
Date: 20 Feb 05 - 12:40 PM

Just got back after the weekend away and tried to get in, but the only way is the back door again. It's 5.41pm in England. That tends to blow the idea of it being someone's work computer a bit.

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Feb 05 - 08:46 AM

Back again within 10 mins; odd!!
G

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Giok 99
Date: 20 Feb 05 - 08:43 AM

13:30 GMT a funny time to die!!
G

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 04:11 PM

Giok...the limp is ok although I hope not to have a limp by the end of all the physio!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 03:24 PM

Back again 20:20

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 03:02 PM

Ooh That Kendall what's he like? Tell him to put it away there's a dear!
Giok¦¬]

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,jacqui.c
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 02:26 PM

it's 14.26 here and it's still out.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Giok 99
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 02:26 PM

Hello Miss Pettigrew [what a good Scottish name]how's your limp?
Giok

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,catsPHiddle
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 02:14 PM

Its 19:15 GMT here and the only way in is through the back door!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Giok in the blizzard.
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 01:55 PM

It has just died again here at about 18:30 GMT after having been a bit 'iffy' for 10 mins or so.
Giok

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 06:16 AM

FWIW Leadfingers, I do think something along those lines is a possibility (and that perhaps the under construction first time round was co-incidence - it is a commonish one when you install a server but don't set pages up). I just don't believe that funweb products is the culprit if it is anything like that.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Leadfingers
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 06:05 AM

Interesting - Saturday NOT a normal working day in UK and the cat seems to be perfectly normal ! Does this help the idea that it is being triggered by someone with a bug on a work 'puter ??

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 05:16 AM

Oh and John, if you are interested, the old original base source code still exists on the web. I've just found it here

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: JennyO
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 05:10 AM

Well if it's gonna go down today (tonight 9.10pm here in Oz) and if it runs true to form, we've got about 5 more minutes or so before it happens again.

Jenny

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 05:03 AM

fogrot to put my name in the last post - sorry.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 05:03 AM

John, you are part right.

A cookie is sent to the site/server, eg. if you were to visit the Annexe, your machine would send me the cookies assosciated with jonbanjo.com and not any other site.

Help and this 99 backdoor are actually the same machine at the moment. www is a different server.

The situation with the help forum is different though. The base of Mudcat was a Cold Fusion tutorial program and help pretty much reflects that old program. It doesn't cater for things like members that were later additions produced by Max/Mudcat.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 04:54 AM

Jon -

I can't say for sure why it doesn't work, but if I have a cookie from the main server, I'm me here, but GUEST if I go to the backdoor server. Apparently that happens to everyone.

I can log in at the backdoor if the main server is up but I can't if the main server doesn't answer. Several people have commented about not being able to log in at the backdoor. If they went there while the main server was responding, I'm pretty sure they could log in there. I've done it.

If I log in at the backdoor, I'm me until I come back here. When I bring the backdoor cookie here (main server) I'm GUEST until I log in on the main server and get a new cookie.

While it surprised me, the cookie I get here, and the cookie I get at the backdoor, are not interchangeable and it won't let me keep both at the same time. (Observed and confirmed by three separate cycles, both servers up, logged in, go to other server and I'm not logged in. Log in on other server, verify login, go back to first server and I'm not logged in. If main server is not responding, I can't log in on the other one.)

Note that when you go to HELP with a cookie from the main server, you're GUEST there too. I frankly haven't tried to log in there, since it's an occasional, and relatively rare, trip. Since HELP is usually up when the main server doesn't respond, it's assumed it's on a different server, but I don't know if it's the same server as the backdoor threads.

I would expect both servers to have the member name list(s); but the backdoor is missing some information, possible the passwords?, that prevents it from letting you log in if the main server isn't there. At least that's been what I've seen on several tries.

If we're on schedule, I suppose the main server should quit responding in about a half hour. I may not stay up for it, since it's 03:52 local now.

John

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 08:09 PM

John, I don't understand why it doesn't work on the back door but I can assure of this.

The "main" MC cookie passes on your usereID (which should be seperate for cookie each server) - a number to recognise you. This will be looked up on the database in the same way things like posts are. That's how 2 servers work here - there is a common database and your Id number with assosciated details will be stored in exactly the same place as posts are stored - but if that went, you would not even be reading posts.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 04:46 PM

Jon -

The backdoor site apparently uses a little different cookie than the main one. If you have a cookie for the main one, it doesn't work when you go to the backdoor. Hence you're GUEST there.

If you get a new cookie by logging in while you're at the backdoor, it appears to overwrite the one from the main server, and you'll be logged in there.

When you come back here (main server), with the cookie you got at the backdoor, you'll be GUEST here until you log in again.

If the main server is bogged down, you can't log in at the backdoor, because the member info needed to verify the login (your name/password) apparently is only on the main server. If you have a backdoor cookie it will work there but not on main. You can't log in and get a backdoor cookie unless the main server is available.

Apparently you can't have cookies valid on both sites on your own machine at the same time. (You could perhaps export one of each into separate folders, and restore whichever one you need, if you want to be logged in on either site.)

At least that's how it worked when I tested it by logging in (while main was accessible) at the backdoor.

John

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 11:20 AM

Front door 16:19pm. What a pain in the sphincter this all is!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 11:08 AM

Back in front door 16:05
G

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 09:51 AM

"...an unusual combination,.."

But one that has proven to work better than this in the past.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Giok 99
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 09:48 AM

Also the site becomes inaccessable at a time when the traffic is lightest, US night time, which means that it can't be caused by the weight of traffic.
Giok

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 09:35 AM

Also, the cookie bit is innacurate. Cookie data is acutualy picked up by a browser (it's stored on your machine) and sent with a page request. The server acts on the cookie data you send it. I'm not sure what this cookie problem is though.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 09:18 AM

Max, according to Netcraft is running O'Reily Website Pro on Win2K. I    don't know when O'Relly stopped doing it but I'd feel fairly safe in suggesting it's an unusual combination, possibly stranger still with Cold Fusion on top.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 09:09 AM

The backdoor is on a different server. And the reason you don't have (can't get) a cookie here is that all the login stuff is on the server that's bogged down. If you ask for a cookie here, this server has to go to that server to make you one, and this server can't get into that server any better than we can.

If you come back in through the backdoor when the main server is accessible, you can get a cookie here - but then you'll have to get another one when you go back to the main server. (been there, done that, just to check it out)

The main complaints I found on the web that are remotely similar are all about the "new" MSN bot. I don't find many that complain about the traffic. Mostly just people that don't want MSN stomping around in their servers.

Three or four descriptions of similar buffer stuffing from bots weren't able to identify the crawler that's causing it. One estimate is that there are over n,000 crawlers out there from decent law-abiding search engines, and quite a few individual users have their own home-made ones; but none of these seem to cause much problem.

Three complaints about heavy traffic all appeared to point to some lawyer that hit once, copied everything on the site, and never came back. Apparently the same lawyer in two of the three. Copyright chaser?

One possibly applicable note that a hard limit on the number of processes the server can start might keep the server from stalling, but it would mean you'd get an error message if the que was full instead of just looking at a blank screen. The experts who were discussing it didn't seem able to come with how to limit the number, and I don't know how similar their front end is to what Max is using now.

John

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Giok 99
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 08:31 AM

You're very picky today Mr McGrath!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,pavane
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 08:23 AM

So why is the 'backdoor' not susceptible to this problem? Is it related to the login process? Is that the only difference?

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 07:25 AM

...like I'm doing here.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 07:24 AM

I suppose it provides a good way of demonstrating that, when picky people like me complain about GUESTs, it's not GUESTs we are complaining about, just the ones who insist on not putting anything in the "From" box.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,wrinkles
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 06:31 AM

well I must admit I'm getting used to this

Mudcat is down in the nornings after about 10am or so (UK Time) abd back up around sometine in the after noon and one has to used the back door.

It's like dealing with a manager who dosn't want to pay you!

Wrinkles

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:57 AM

"I agree, 10:15ish and it goes kaput!
Maybe we should keep a record of this!"

Won't find anything to play it on. Keep a CD instead.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Azizi
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:36 AM

I could ask Brucie don't you have better things to do at 3:15 AM..
But I guess he could ask me the same thing at 5:31 AM..

So I'll keep my mouth shut ;o))


Azizi

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Azizi
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:34 AM

I tried at 5:31 AM Eastern time...and couldn't get in the front door..

but it may have been locked before then.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Crystal
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:26 AM

I agree, 10:15ish and it goes kaput!
Maybe we should keep a record of this!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:25 AM

It was 3:15 AM Alberta time. Same thing.

Brucie

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:20 AM

That's it 10:15 UK time on the dot, seized up again. Max must be tearing his hair out. I'm still a bit curious that this round of problems although blamed on Fun Web coincided with a new bit of software, anyway good luck Max in sorting it out.
Giok

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Peace
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:07 AM

Be still my beating heart.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 05:05 AM

Lucky you!!

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 02:55 AM

I resent the remark that it is the fault of us 'Brits drinking too much tea'....

I hate tea and consequently never drink the stuff..

But Mudcat goes down on me quite regularly : )!

LTS

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:36 PM

Off for an after tea sleep now but thanks John. That's about all I've come up with too - users either being advised to or wanting to get shut of the pest.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:31 PM

Loads of possibilities Steve, including spyware & adware slowing up a computer. Please don't let my doubts about this particular diagnosis put you off considering a program like spybot. Even when I was on Windows I managed to muddle through without a need but it wasn't so long back Pip asked me to look at hers (for those that know the machines, I'd say a 1ghz machine was running more like a 486) and what I found on it was a sort of horror story - it was no wonder things were slow and it took me hours by hand to get it clean again.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:29 PM

Jon -

I don't generally go into the "webmeister" sites, so I don't know much about what they talk about, except what arrives in the couple of newletters I get. The "user help" sites do have quite a lot of chatter from people who have difficulty getting rid of Fun Ware stuff. The difficulty is that the "FunWare" kits can be bundled into any kind of crudware someone wants to attach it to, so you can't really tell much about what additional felons are actually responsible for spreading a specific version, or whether the removal difficulties are Fun Ware design or something someone's tacked on.

Since COAST collapsed, about the only semi-organized anticrud group I've hit on has been Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals. I don't know anything about the "Alliance" although I see several individual "help" web sites that I recognize by name.

Several of the "members" linked in the sidebar require a login to look at what they've got, so I haven't gone to many of them. One "member site" with whom I happen to have some familiarity, TomCoyote, shows 51 hits for a site search for "Fun Web" (0 for FunWeb). The few I looked at seem to be all individuals trying to get rid of search toolbars. Apparently there are several "added gimmicks" in stuff that bundles the Fun Ware components into some of their own stuff.

Nothing too helpful, I'm afraid.

Incidentally, the main site is back up apparently. I got in at about 11:40 or so Central US time (~12:40 'cat time), if you're still on the other server.

John

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: Steve in Sidmouth
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:09 PM

There are times I can't get mudcat but I agree there are other sites that have become slow or simply inaccessible recently. Hotmail.com is virtually unusable on both my computers running IE5.5 or IE6. Pages get half way loaded then just hang and will not refresh. They work OK using Firefox - but very occasionally I get the same problem using this browser too. Why I ask myself. Most other sites are fine. Hotmail.co.uk (a new site) is much faster, I guess because it is a different and less heavily used server. Ebay is quicker with Firefox. Don't understand it.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:05 PM

John, even then, I would expect an explosion in the size of my logs at sommme time, even if I wasn't able to detect it.

Regardless of that sort of thing, the lack of a google result indicating others have the same problem remains my biggest concern,

The other is that only one of two Mudcat servers gets it, I know of no other site that does, etc. and as for resources available, surely on £50 pa, I'm smaller than MC and have less to play with by far?

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 12:40 PM

Jon -

If the search bot spawns a new bot to follow a branching thread, only one "visitor" would be required, and only one "parent" bot need be deposited. There might well be an "incubation period" but with the 'cat structure of crosslinked and never ending strings of links, any replication of bots would soon - or eventually - lead to massive crowds of the vermin.(?)

My understanding is that the "reputable" search indexing people usually place a bot at a known place, with instructions to search "n deep" and then go home. When the bot dies, they launch a new one with similar limited range if there are unexplored links they want to check out. An indexing system that tries to use "free-roaming" bots, especially if they rely on surreptitious "planting" as FunWeb apparently does (and several others do), would likely be able to "benefit" if the bots could replicate. Even with very slow replication, this could easily saturate the resources of a site like the cat. They don't know where their bots are, so they'd need to make them persistent.

Still just guessing.

John

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 12:32 PM

Of course my bigger problem is not one of reading the logs but not managing to google and find an article leading one way or other, Such supporting evidence really would be handy.

Subject: RE: What's up with Mudcat this time!!???
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 12:18 PM

John,

There is no probability about the sub population. I only get a fraction - 500th or maybe less that that of regualrish posters here,

What I would expect to find if I was getting hit by a MC member wuth funweb products on if it is doing the sort of hits I'd imagine would be needed to break a site would be evidence like that one "visitor" had been to everywhere and to every thread in a short time. Such evidence does not exist and being, as you rightly say, quiet, it does make it very easy for me to search through my logs.