🚀 go-pugleaf

Pedt, morphed as "????, ??????" wrote:

> In message <mF80Y1f3wTjFFwDF@molly.mockford>, Molly Mockford
> <nospamnobody@mollymockford.me.uk> writes
> >At 07:01:46 on Sat, 23 Dec 2006, Pedt <"\"@ @\""@operations.force9.net>
> >wrote in <7fHgYjDaRNjFFwA$@stuff-the-spammers.mx2.org.uk>:
> >
> >>Owner of the site is raising it with the authors after we spotted the
> >>bug but thought I'd mention here that there is a login bug with SMF in
> >>case anyone has SMF deployed on a public site.
> >
> >Which version of SMF, Pedt?  1.1, 1.0.9 or earlier?
>
> Sorry for slow reply, away over Xmas.
>
> 1.1.1
>
> Not an SMF bug, more a user error according to the report back. Muchos
> Kudos to SMF who checked it out quickly, especially given the time of
> year. 23rd I gave the site admin the recipe for reproducing it who'd
> passed it one the same day before replying to my post.
>
>
> Site owner said this (domain munged to protect the guilty) ...
>

It was Craig Oldfield.

> <quote>
> The bods at SMF checked out my site and spotted that instead of
> http://www.deleted.co.uk/sanctuary/

http://www.craigoldfield.co.uk/sanctuary

> it was
> http://deleted.co.uk/sanctuary/

http://craigoldfield.co.uk/sanctuary

> so bypassing what should have been the normal start page. A quick change
> in the settings and job done. Certainly kudos to them for checking it
> out so quickly and being very gentle in pointing out a user error. don't
> know why it didn't show up in the last version though.
> </quote>
>
> Not had the time to chase it up with the site owner yet but it looks
> like he put http://domain not http://www.domain/ in a configuration
> file.
>
> Still worth mentioning here though IMO as others may have done the same
> especially if there's a bit of CNAMEing being done.
> 

Or they are competent.