Error 500 - wwwRedirect

[VanKlomp]

hxxp:www.rsobb.co.uk/index.php?PHPSESSID=dc0fec75f701090377efd5d8aedeee2c:wwwRedirect [nonactive]

If the following link is used, a 500 Internal Server error is generated. The person who reported this had created a bookmark to the forum after visiting the forum without typing 'www' in the address bar. The result was a link that contained a session ID and a wwwRedirect element.

If the link is visited less the 'wwwRedirect' part, no error is received.

hxxp:www.rsobb.co.uk/index.php?PHPSESSID=dc0fec75f701090377efd5d8aedeee2c [nonactive]

I checked for an existing bug like this but could not find one.

Hosting
SMF 2.0 RC4
Apache version 2.2.17
PHP version 5.2.17
MySQL version 5.1.56

Mods
SimplePortal 2.3.3
KeyCAPTCHA for SMF 2.0
Tapatalk SMF 2.0 RC4/RC5 Plugin 2.0.0
SMF 2.0 RC4 Security Patch 1.0
Mibbit Ajax IRC Chat Mod 2.0
Treasury 2.08
Users Online Today 1.5.6

Themes
SMF Default Theme - Curve (2.0 RC4)
Core Theme (2.0 RC4)
Flagrant_alt (2.0 RC4)
SMF4iPhone (2.0 RC4)

I had error logging enabled but it did not log anything.

Thanks

[Illori]

this is not a bug please see

some searching on this forum lead to http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=312299.0

[VanKlomp]

Are you sure?

My issue is not that the redirect is taking place, it is the resulting error message received.

[Illori]

most people find that fix will fix it. I have not seen the issue myself but everyone has been able to resolve it without making a "bug report" on the issue. Sounds like something is up with your server configuration somehow which is related to this.

[VanKlomp]

For starters, that's not a fix. It's a workaround, there is a difference. The forum software should not allow for that error to be produced, to an end user that is a problem.

There is nothing wrong with the hosting configuration, and this was reproduced on a vanilla installation of SMF 2.0 RC5. Thus it is not the hosting and it is not a mod. This is why a "bug report" was created (though why you felt the need to enclose it in quotes is beyond me). It's always refreshing when the "support" talks down to it's user base.

[Illori]

i could test it on my localhost install, but since it is not configured the same as your host i would not be able to duplicate it, which means it is an issue with your server and not the forum software.

[Adish - (F.L.A.M.E.R)]

Can you please provide us with your ./public_html/.htaccess ?

Also, can you please provide us with your phpinfo() ?
What is a phpinfo() file?

[Aleksi "Lex" Kilpinen]

If you have access to your server error logs, please take a look at what is logged there when this happens - If you do not, please ask your host to check out if this could be due to mod_security or a similar security tool. Normally mod_security blocks end up in either HTTP 500 "Interna error", or a HTTP 403 "Forbidden".

[VanKlomp]

Can you please provide us with your ./public_html/.htaccess ?

Also, can you please provide us with your phpinfo() ?
What is a phpinfo() file?

Hi,

hxxp:www.rsobb.co.uk/_tester.php [nonactive] <-- There for the moment, better than quoting it me thinks.

.htaccess

Code Select Expand

#
# Uncomment the statement below if you want to make use of
# HTTP authentication and it does not already work.
# This could be required if you are for example using PHP via Apache CGI.
#
#<IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
#RewriteEngine on
#RewriteRule .* - [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L]
#</IfModule>

<Files "config.php">
Order Allow,Deny
Deny from All
</Files>

<Files "common.php">
Order Allow,Deny
Deny from All
</Files>



[BartB]

It is a bug and it's still there. Even if the server configuration is not optimal, SMF should not throw this error but tackle it.

Cause of the problem: In the URL you'll see:

?PHPSESSID=0203226ebb7db961777813d150b84673;action=community

The ';' before 'action' should be a '&'. I have no idea why there's a ';' there but it's causing my server too to give me the ERROR 500

v. 2.0.6  - and no clue how to solve it.

[Kindred]

it's because your host has a configuration issue that things the semi-colon is a hack

[BartB]

Ok, so far I'm with you. Now trust me when I tell you that I can not convince my hoster to change anything in that area. Changing hosters is not really an option and shouldn't be neccessary either.

If only someone could tell me where SMF puts the semi-colon in the URL. So I can change that into the '&'. Problem solved.

So... Please?

[Shambles]

I thought this old topic was marked solved    

[JBlaze]

Ok, so far I'm with you. Now trust me when I tell you that I can not convince my hoster to change anything in that area. Changing hosters is not really an option and shouldn't be neccessary either.

If only someone could tell me where SMF puts the semi-colon in the URL. So I can change that into the '&'. Problem solved.

So... Please?

The semicolon is hardcoded into all links inside SMF. This would not be an easy change, and I don't believe that this is being changed anytime soon in either 2.1 or 3.0.

[BartB]

I thought this old topic was marked solved    

If it was, it should not be. It is not at all solved.

[Kindred]

well - it might be because the post is 2+ years old and you are not the original poster....

and this is a problem with a poor host. (SMF does not throw the error, the host does - the URL is completely valid)

[BartB]

well - it might be because the post is 2+ years old and you are not the original poster....

and this is a problem with a poor host. (SMF does not throw the error, the host does - the URL is completely valid)

So just because I'm not the original poster but the problem he had/has is the same that I have, I can not 're-open' it? And a poor hoster? Nah. I think that the majority of hosters won't let you mess with the PHP.INI. We don't all have our own dedicated servers.

[Illori]

no you can not reopen someone elses topic [unsolve it] ideally you should have opened your own topic and not bumped a topic that someone else started.

[BartB]

no you can not reopen someone elses topic [unsolve it] ideally you should have opened your own topic and not bumped a topic that someone else started.

I'm not here to start meta-discussions, but isn't that a bit silly? To create multiple threads for the same question?

[Illori]

no it is not silly, even though your question may be similar to another question already asked, it may not be the EXACT same. so opening your own topic helps us help you better.