GreenguyandJim Fighting Zango

darksoul · 2006-10-25, 09:43 AM

Jim,
I think the coincidence is a bit too big!
plus you modifyed that .htaccess so badly that you even broke it

Code:

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^$

this means that users with no referrers won't be redirected
if they have ZangoToolbar. Why would you want that ?

Code:

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(.*@)?([a-z0-9-]+\.)*yourdomain\.com(:[0-9]+)?(/.*)?$ [NC]

yourdomain.com\.com(:[0-9]+)? makes no sense either because in mod_rewrite language it means:
"the url might be of the form yourdomain.com:135" or any other group of digits
Is that a new tld extension ?

Using stuff like (.*@)?([a-z0-9-]+\.)* is overkill when you can simply use (.*)? which will match anything.

2006-10-25, 09:43 AM	#11
darksoul Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 13	Jim, I think the coincidence is a bit too big! plus you modifyed that .htaccess so badly that you even broke it Code: RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^$ this means that users with no referrers won't be redirected if they have ZangoToolbar. Why would you want that ? Code: RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(.@)?([a-z0-9-]+\.)yourdomain\.com(:[0-9]+)?(/.)?$ [NC] yourdomain.com\.com(:[0-9]+)? makes no sense either because in mod_rewrite language it means: "the url might be of the form yourdomain.com:135" or any other group of digits Is that a new tld extension ? Using stuff like (.@)?([a-z0-9-]+\.)* is overkill when you can simply use (.*)? which will match anything.