I am currently building a website and I want to add the HTTP 404 not found Error page. I designed the bad request page and its link is this, for example:
www.mysite.com/badr.cshtml
The problem is, I want to show the contents of this page on every invalid request without redirecting to that link. For example, if I type www.mysite.com/noexistingpage, the contents of badr.cshtml should load without redirecting to it.
And for your information, I am using Webmatrix2.
you do this via the web.config and the custom errors section.
http://www.localwisdom.com/blog/2010/08/how-to-setup-custom-404s-for-iis-and-asp-net-through-web-config/
Related
When Spring MVC does a redirect, should the page redirected to be able to process embedded src attributes that hit a server to fetch an image, as if loading a page for the first time? It works correctly when accessed via a link on a web page. Is redirect different than loading a new page via a link? My understanding was that redirect should load a page completely, resolving all references, similar to the way it does when navigating to it via a link on a web page. Is my understanding incorrect?
An HTTP response known as a redirect looks like this
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Location: http://www.yourhost.com/some-page
Connection: close
That's it. When your browser receives this response, it will send a new HTTP GET request to the URI in the Location header.
Your error is somewhere else.
I'm a noob when it comes to ASP.NET. I know few basic commands such as Response.Redirect("URL") to redirect my application web page to a different location.
However i receive HTTP Error 400 - Bad Request, whenever i try to use the code shown below
Response.Redirect(Server.UrlEncode(this.Downloadlink));
where this.Downloadlink is a user defined property which returns something like this
http://mdn.vatsag.net/fp;files/DOWNLOAD/VTSetup.exe
If i post this link in the browser, the .exe file pops up (means the link is good)
However this error comes when i use the ASP.NET code.
Any form of response on this issue/reason is deeply appreciated.
See here: http://www.kirit.com/Response.Redirect%20and%20encoded%20URIs
In short: if you quickly want to fix the issue, remove the part of your code that is UrlEncoding the URL!
Using forms authentication, is it possible to return a 404 if a user doesn't have access to content, rather than redirecting them somewhere?
I realize I could send them to a 404-ish page, or redirect to a login page that doesn't exist, but I really want to return a 404 from the page they were attempting to access.
Possible?
Better would be to send them to a 403 (Forbidden) page, but still have it look like a normal page from your site.
You should think of customized 404 pages with recommended navigational options when website visitors request pages that return a 404 response code. So I am in support of sending users to a 404-ish page with search options, other navigational links along with a notification that the user has reached a page that does not exist
You are going to have a hard time catching a 403 much less redirect it.
There is a long standing 'bug' in the forms authentication module that simply dumps 'under-authorized' to the registered login page with a 200 OK.
So, not only can you not easily catch a 403 - from my experience 403 has never been a viable candidate for a custom error page. I am not sure why MS has left it in the default web.config for 10 years.
In any case, I have developed a module that will fix this behavior, the code and details can be found here: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/39062/Salient-Web-Security-AccessControlModule.aspx
The language of the article is tilted towards ajax type requests, but the module is designed with webform based forms authentication in mind as well.
The default configuration will give you the ability to process 403 with a custom error page which can be a simple handler that generates a 404, which will in turn be processed by any custom 404 page you have defined, if any.
So, from here...
In ASP.NET, you have a choice about how to respond to that - it's in the web.config as CustomErrors. Turn that on, then redirect to a fancy 404 page (maybe you already do). The fancy 404 page, then, could be checking the requested querystring (which gets passed over to the custom error page as yet another querystring) to see if it's a valid redirect, lives in your database, etc. Just do a Response.Redirect() from there.
Then schooner writes:
Thanks, we do have a 404 now but we would prefer this not to be detected as a 404 in the process. We would like ot handle it directly and seperately if possible.
..and I'd like to know just how bad a practice this is. I don't expect to put my "pretty" URLs on the internet (just business cards) and I have a sample of 404-redirecting-to-a-helpful-site code working, but I don't want to get to production and have an issue with a browser that takes the initial 404 too seriously. Can anyone help me understand more about why I wouldn't want to use customErrors / 404 to flow users to the page they actually wanted?
The main problem with using customeErrors as your 404 error handler is that every time customErrors picks up an errored request rather than throwing a 404 error back to your browser and letting your browser know there was a bad request, it instead returns a 302 which indicates that a page has been relocated to whatever your customErrors page is. This isn't bad for most users because they don't know or even notice the difference, the problem comes from the fact that web crawlers DO know the difference and the status code they receive directly affects how their indexing works.
Consider the scenario where you have a page at http://mysite.com/MyAwesomePageAboutStuff.aspx for some period of time and then one day you decide you no longer need it and delete the file. If Google or some other crawler has already indexed that URL and goes back to it after you delete it the crawler will get a 302 status code instead of a 404 error and because of this status code the crawler will update the page's url to point to your error page rather deleting the non-existent link. Now, whenever someone finds that url by way of a search engine they'll end up at your error page.
It's not really a huge issue, but you can definitely see the headaches this can create for your users in the long run.
Look here for some corroborating data.
I created a vanity url system using the 404 as the handler. There's no need for a 302 on my side as the 404 dynamically loads the content and returns that. I am fully able to handle any and all POST / GET and SERVER data.
Works great. If you are interested TarantulaHawk is up on SourceForge.
I am building a simple HTTP server for a project.
Most websites have custom 404 error pages. Sometimes though, you'll see Firefox spitting a generic 404 page (or 405, etc...).
How does it decide what to do?
What should the HTTP response be?
Is "HTTP/1.0 404 NOT FOUND" enough?
Thanks
If server can't find the requested resource (e.g. a webpage), it sends an HTTP/1.0 404 NOT FOUND in the HTTP header section.
Servers can map an error page for this error, so you can get a readable error page. Browsers can also map an own error page, so you can see a browser-specific error 404 message.
You can see the error code in the status field in log files.
You can redirect your user to a specific page with this structure:
<HTML>
<head>
<meta HTTP-EQUIV="Refresh" CONTENT="5; URL=not404.htm">
</head>
</HTML>
See details on Welcome to 404 Error Pages .com
It is perfectly valid to return an html body with a 404 response code. If no body is provided then the browser will show a default page.
If you only send HTTP/1.0 404 NOT FOUND then the browser default will be displayed.
If you add a body to the response the browser will mostly use that.
If you are creating an HTTP server you might want to look at the RFC that describes the protocol: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2616.html
For the 404 status code it says:
The server has not found anything
matching the Request-URI. No
indication is given of whether the
condition is temporary or
permanent. The 410 (Gone) status code
SHOULD be used if the server knows,
through some internally configurable
mechanism, that an old resource is
permanently unavailable and has no
forwarding address. This status
code is commonly used when the server
does not wish to reveal exactly why
the request has been refused, or when
no other response is applicable.
You can't control how the browser will treat each status code, you shuld rely on its good behaviour.
That said, you may benefit from using one of the existing HTTP servers. Look at this question on how to create an HTTP server in C or C++ posted few days ago,
So, Firefox won't show a generic 404 error page under most circumstances; you're thinking of Internet Explorer, which ignores a website's 404 page if it's below a certain size and displays its own.
Usually it set up in the webserver, ie: When the server gets a 404, refer it to this page.