On Monday 15 March 2021 at 18:37:40, Jason Long wrote:
> Yes. I saw the same IP address.
What is the answer to Richard's question: "what was the response code? Was it
(still) a 200 or was it a 401 or 403 or something else?"
> What is the problem?
The problem is that your block list is not getting used correctly.
For now we just don't know why.
Given that this discussion has been going on for quite some time and various
things have been tried, suggested, tested and reported, I no longer have a
clear idea of what your Apache configuration for this is, so please can you
post here:
1. Your Apache configuration for the website in question
2. A clear indication of how you are implementing the block list
3. A small sample of how the IP addresses are specified in the block list
By all means obfuscate anything you think is necessary, but please make it
obvious:
a) where you have done so, and
b) where two obfuscated things are actually the same
This might help anyone who may be able to help, to be sure they're starting
from the correct understanding and assumptions.
> On Monday, March 15, 2021, 05:07:07 PM GMT+3:30, Antony Stone wrote:
>
> So, just to be clear, you added 46.167.45.* to your file of blocked IPs,
> restarted Apache, re-visited your website, and found the same address again
> in Apache's access file with a timestamp after the restart?
>
>
> Antony.
--
If you ask a Yorkshireman whether he knows the German word for "egg",
don't be surprised if he just smiles and says "Aye".
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|