On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings. I don't mind
keeping them if they make up even 1/100 of a percent of the trafic, but it
seems silly
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:58:56 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time), Joshua Slive
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take
a look through their logs for these user-agent strings. I don't mind
keeping them if they make up even 1/100 of a
My only concern is folks who just reinstalled their OS, and
then, mostly for support sites. I'd think the typical server
wouldn't need to deal with these. It's also odd to use regex
for non-pattern strings, like these. All of them could be
trivial strcmp's rather than the regex sledgehammer.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
My only concern is folks who just reinstalled their OS, and
then, mostly for support sites. I'd think the typical server
wouldn't need to deal with these. It's also odd to use regex
for non-pattern strings, like these. All of them could be
trivial strcmp's rather
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
...
BrowserMatch Mozilla/2 nokeepalive
BrowserMatch MSIE 4\.0b2; nokeepalive downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0
BrowserMatch RealPlayer 4\.0 force-response-1.0
BrowserMatch Java/1\.0 force-response-1.0
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings. I don't mind
keeping them if they make up even 1/100 of a percent of the trafic, but it
seems silly
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings. I don't mind
keeping them if they make up even 1/100 of a percent of the trafic, but it
seems silly to keep these extra regexes on every single request if these
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
BrowserMatch Mozilla/2 nokeepalive
I don't know about the rest, but Ask Jeeves spoofs this user-agent in
its webcrawls;
Mozilla/2.0 (compatible; Ask Jeeves/Teoma;
+http://sp.ask.com/docs/about/tech_crawling.html)
Not sure if the
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings. I don't mind
keeping them if they make up even 1/100 of a percent of the trafic, but it
seems silly
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings.
I, uh, have just a few logs that I can scan. ;-)
I'll use Blogger/BlogSpot logs, as those will have a
On Apr 3, 2005, at 7:57 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 01:58:56PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Does someone with a high-traffic, general-interest web site want to
take a
look through their logs for these user-agent strings.
I, uh, have just a few logs that I can scan. ;-)
Showoff.
11 matches
Mail list logo
