CCBill links with encoded '&' don't work - Page 2

cd34 · 2006-09-14, 04:45 PM

In Firefox 1.5.0.6 with cookies set to 'Ask Everytime'

if I key the link in directly into firefox, & will not set the cookie
If I key the link in directly with & rather than &, it will set the cookie
If I cut and paste a link from a page set with a doctype of transitional, it works.
If I cut and paste a link on a doctype set with strict and the url not contained within CDATA (in other words, a page that won't validate) , the cookie is not set.

Additionally, if the link is coded through a script and sent as:

Code:

<a href="test.php?blahblah=1&j=http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=xxxxxx-0000&amp;PA=xxxxxx">test</a>

Code:

<?php

header("Location: {$_REQUEST['j']}");

?>

it will not set the cookie because the location header that 99% of the tradescripts are using doesn't de-entify before sending to ccbill.

IE exhibits some odd behavior depending on which version you use. 5.5 does not deentify before sending in my tests. 6.0 does most of the time, but, failed once. I believe ccbill should set the cookie each time regardless of whether there is already a cookie present for that master account number, but, that isn't what I observed in one of the tests I did above. And after it happened, I couldn't duplicate it.

According to the RFC, the browser is supposed to deentify when going to a url, but, clearly when you cut and paste a url into firefox, there is no way for firefox to guess what action it should take.

Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on the browser guessing at what is supposed to happen.

FiReC · 2006-09-14, 06:03 PM

Just to clarify you are talking about browser problems deentifying when copying and pasting entities directly to the address bar and not when links are clicked on a page?

cd34 · 2006-09-14, 06:27 PM

if a surfer right-clicks on a url on a page and pastes it into their browser, depending on a few different factors, they can get the entified or deentified link.

Since there is some inconsistency there, or, when used in trade scripts, etc, it just seems to me that better safe than sorry would be the rule of thumb. Especially since IE 5.5 also seems to exhibit the behavior even on clicked links.

double0 · 2006-09-24, 07:48 PM

Has anyone talked to a ccbill rep on this?

Everyone is blaming their text editors for encoding ampersands when really that's what they should be doing. I think it's ccbill that needs to address this on their end. Would it be that hard credit links with encoded ampersands?

Going through all our links looking for encoded ampersands seems like a lot of unnecessary work especially considering that that's the way they should be written.

Given time and exposure this may even hurt pay sites as webmasters might choose to not bother with sites that use referral links in this "risky" format.

Bertik · 2006-09-28, 05:12 AM

I am very newbie so please be gently.
Question is
can I change the code (replace & with just &) on existing submitted free sites and then upload it to server? Will I be banned for this?

I have found several affected links to sponsor on my sites.

Thank you
Bertik

Licker4U · 2006-09-28, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bertik

I am very newbie so please be gently.
Question is
can I change the code (replace & with just &) on existing submitted free sites and then upload it to server? Will I be banned for this?

I did that in the past with no problems.

tickler · 2006-09-28, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by double0

Has anyone talked to a ccbill rep on this?

I'd like to hear what ccBill has to say about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by double0

Everyone is blaming their text editors for encoding ampersands when really that's what they should be doing. I think it's ccbill that needs to address this on their end. Would it be that hard credit links with encoded ampersands?

I have found a few PPC linksthat ended up with the encoded amp. It seems to be only some links that I have gone back and modified though.

virgohippy · 2006-09-28, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tickler

I have found a few PPC linksthat ended up with the encoded amp. It seems to be only some links that I have gone back and modified though.

Same here. I guess those nifty html editors don't like creative construction of urls.

tickler · 2006-09-28, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by virgohippy

Same here. I guess those nifty html editors don't like creative construction of urls.

Actually I was referring to their online maintenance systems. Probably in PHP or CGI.

virgohippy · 2006-09-29, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tickler

Actually I was referring to their online maintenance systems. Probably in PHP or CGI.

Ya lost me... whose maintenance system? |confused|

tickler · 2006-09-29, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by virgohippy

Ya lost me... whose maintenance system? |confused|

A few of the PPC advertising programs have a small problem with encoding the links if you have gone back and change the links.

bartjes · 2006-10-02, 06:03 AM

I never have this problem in normal html since I use a text editor, but i do have it in wordpress posts. Anyone knows a solution to that?

virgohippy · 2006-10-02, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bartjes

I never have this problem in normal html since I use a text editor, but i do have it in wordpress posts. Anyone knows a solution to that?

Modify your wordpress now, and every time you update?

bartjes · 2007-02-06, 12:48 PM

I'm not sure I understand what you mean virgohippy

2006-09-14, 04:45 PM	#26
cd34 a.k.a. Sparky Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: West Palm Beach, FL, USA Posts: 2,396	In Firefox 1.5.0.6 with cookies set to 'Ask Everytime' if I key the link in directly into firefox, & will not set the cookie If I key the link in directly with & rather than &, it will set the cookie If I cut and paste a link from a page set with a doctype of transitional, it works. If I cut and paste a link on a doctype set with strict and the url not contained within CDATA (in other words, a page that won't validate) , the cookie is not set. Additionally, if the link is coded through a script and sent as: Code: <a href="test.php?blahblah=1&j=http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=xxxxxx-0000&PA=xxxxxx">test</a> Code: <?php header("Location: {$_REQUEST['j']}"); ?> it will not set the cookie because the location header that 99% of the tradescripts are using doesn't de-entify before sending to ccbill. IE exhibits some odd behavior depending on which version you use. 5.5 does not deentify before sending in my tests. 6.0 does most of the time, but, failed once. I believe ccbill should set the cookie each time regardless of whether there is already a cookie present for that master account number, but, that isn't what I observed in one of the tests I did above. And after it happened, I couldn't duplicate it. According to the RFC, the browser is supposed to deentify when going to a url, but, clearly when you cut and paste a url into firefox, there is no way for firefox to guess what action it should take. Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on the browser guessing at what is supposed to happen. __________________ SnapReplay.com a different way to share photos - iPhone & Android

2006-09-14, 06:03 PM	#27
FiReC A woman is like beer. They look good, they smell good, and you'd step over your own mother just to get one! Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 53	Just to clarify you are talking about browser problems deentifying when copying and pasting entities directly to the address bar and not when links are clicked on a page? __________________ www.katrina18.com \| www.nubiles.net \| www.sweetkandie.com \| www.vickyvane.com

2006-09-14, 06:27 PM	#28
cd34 a.k.a. Sparky Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: West Palm Beach, FL, USA Posts: 2,396	if a surfer right-clicks on a url on a page and pastes it into their browser, depending on a few different factors, they can get the entified or deentified link. Since there is some inconsistency there, or, when used in trade scripts, etc, it just seems to me that better safe than sorry would be the rule of thumb. Especially since IE 5.5 also seems to exhibit the behavior even on clicked links. __________________ SnapReplay.com a different way to share photos - iPhone & Android

2006-10-02, 06:03 AM	#37
bartjes If something goes wrong at the plant, blame the guy who can't speak English Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 35	I never have this problem in normal html since I use a text editor, but i do have it in wordpress posts. Anyone knows a solution to that? __________________ Blog: Lesbians and Teens \| Webmasters submit freesites

2007-02-06, 12:48 PM	#39
bartjes If something goes wrong at the plant, blame the guy who can't speak English Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 35	I'm not sure I understand what you mean virgohippy __________________ Blog: Lesbians and Teens \| Webmasters submit freesites

2006-09-24, 07:48 PM	#29
double0 Internet! Is that thing still around? Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 2	Has anyone talked to a ccbill rep on this? Everyone is blaming their text editors for encoding ampersands when really that's what they should be doing. I think it's ccbill that needs to address this on their end. Would it be that hard credit links with encoded ampersands? Going through all our links looking for encoded ampersands seems like a lot of unnecessary work especially considering that that's the way they should be written. Given time and exposure this may even hurt pay sites as webmasters might choose to not bother with sites that use referral links in this "risky" format.

2006-09-28, 05:12 AM	#30
Bertik Internet! Is that thing still around? Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 7	I am very newbie so please be gently. Question is can I change the code (replace & with just &) on existing submitted free sites and then upload it to server? Will I be banned for this? I have found several affected links to sponsor on my sites. Thank you Bertik