Victoria / Bandwidth

jackrabbit · Post by **jackrabbit** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 4:35 am

Patty,

It appears that the only inline image from my site that is being hit with any regularity is the picture of Mark holding the lite girl in the What is happening at Superbabe2000.com thread.

I created a small version of that picture with a name of babe_24_small.jpg, so if you could change the [img] to point to that and then add a [url] pointing to the original babe_24.jpg with "click for full size pic" or something similar, that would be great.

jackrabbit · Post by **jackrabbit** » Tue Aug 06, 2002 11:21 am

By the way, I know this isn't much use unless you can modify your web server, as I can.

However, here's an alternative approach that I found.

It has several disadvantages:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI>it is implemented in javascript, which can be turned off in the browser

<LI>it must be implemented on a per page basis, whereas the server approach works for the entire site

<LI>the source is visible, so there is a greater chance that the person locked out will figure out what is going on

<LI>as implemented, it tells the user he is deliberatly being blocked. I prefer my approach of making him think the site is dead.

</UL>

However, if you can't change your web server, this is better than nothing. [img]modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

jackrabbit · Post by **jackrabbit** » Tue Aug 06, 2002 8:24 pm

Earlier in this thread I mentioned plans to modify my web server to abort what I call "hostile links", i.e. web pages that link to my site for purposes of ridicule rather than actual interest in dolls.

I have now implemented this modification.

By default, when you click on a link, the page you are currently on, i.e. the page containing the link, is sent in the "Referer" header of the http request. This information is available to the web server, and mine displays these in the log. For instance, in my case:

<BLOCKQUOTE>code:<HR><pre>
TCP-80/2 / <- http://www.charliejoanne.com/friends.html
TCP-80/2 / <- http://www.rdanjie.com/favorite.html
TCP-80/5 / <- http://www.matrix.www.DollForum.com/female/B2H10.html
TCP-80/5 / <- http://matrix.www.DollForum.com/female/B2H10.html
TCP-80/1 / <- http://www.kuroneko-chan.com/links.html
TCP-80/1 / <- http://www.charliejoanne.com/friends.html
TCP-80/1 / <- http://www.charliejoanne.com/friends.html
</pre><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As you can see, the links shown are pretty much the ones that are expected, i.e. the legitimate links. Note, the above links have been modified to not work, so as not to pester the site owners..

However, sometimes I see one I don't recognize. The complete url is there, so I go and look at the page. If it looks benign, I leave it alone and make a note to expect it in the future.

However, if I think the link is hostile, I add it to a list of bad referer URLs. When the server sees a referer matching one of those on the list, it redirects the request to this bogus page, which makes the hostile party think the site has been terminated. He and his buddies can then giggle amongst themselves about how they overloaded the dollfucker site and took it down. The important thing is that they don't try any more. So each person makes one hit on the site, with no images, as oppposed to dozens of hits transferring images from the galleries. Hopefully the link, which is apparently dead anyway, will eventually be removed.

Legitimate accesses, i.e. those not coming from a url on the list, are unaffected by this. Well, except for last Sunday morning, when I was testing the mod. I apologize if anyone had trouble reaching the site then. [img]modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

mrdouble · Post by **mrdouble** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 12:01 am

Jackrabbit

I once had the same problem as you, unknown websites linking to my files for their own use. For instance, some websites will use your image/file server to display stuff on their page.

So what I did was have part of the image URL look like this-

/imagedirectory293543sdfs4/....

then once a month did a search/replace to change the image URLs to-

/imagedirectory23kdjs01/....

Works fairly well as the thief gets tired of tracking down the ever-changing link URLs. Alot of scam sites from other countries will create a cover page, then imbed other site's links. They then have a site like yours but with different wallpaper and NO overhead.

Another method is to use relative vs. absolute links. However doing this will allow yet another thief to copy all your html and create a site without doing any work.

relative link: "../../filedirectory/carrie.jpg"

absolute link "http://www.jackrabbit.com/a/b/filedirectory/carrie.jpg"

just a thought

mrdouble

hockeyfan · Post by **hockeyfan** » Mon Sep 02, 2002 7:40 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by jackrabbit:
Maybe if there was some sort of limit on size. I don't have a problem with little inline images. It's the big ones that kill me, both in the browser and in the web server.

Maybe people could be encouraged to do what I did in a couple of threads. Post a little picture inline and have a link to the full size one that people can click on. Admittedly, this requires having image software to shrink the original image, and then you have to be able to store it on a web server somewhere. Not everybody can do that.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great Idea... I wonder if UBB will have that feature in the future to allow locked scaling so the bigger files are "thumbed". HTML can "shrink" pictures without modifying the source file if they are small in filesize.(This should save you time and money looking of a solution Jackrabbit, if you upgrade to Windows XP it has this build in by right clicking and choosing "Resize Image", Linux has The Gimp that can change image file size especially those huge Digital 1200X1600 high detail files.)

Here is an example of rendering a large file to a smaller screen value.

{begin tag with "<" img src="file:///www.blah.orgz/images/under-construction.gif" width="300" height="150" {end of tag ">"}

The original was width 600X300 and it scaled wonderfully and the download size of 19k was modified to 1k.

For those that view this site with a 800X600 display sometimes the larger pics make their screen have a scroll bar at the bottom of the page. This isn't a problem, however it screws up the following posts making them scroll to read the end of sentences because the text wrapping now is off the screen.

A perfect example of this 800X600 issue is:
SuperBabe Estella Warren Wish ---- (View this at 800X600 to see what I am trying to say)

I will just log off the laptop (I will buy a doll before I replace this laptop) [img]modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img], and switch to my high-end video workstation if it bothers me.

If you wanted to give away your high quality 1200X1600 jpegs, I would zip them up and allow them to be downloaded. Don't forget to add your Copyright to them via The Gimp/Photoshop. This one file download lets you make easy calculations on bandwidth by checking on it in the logs ie in Linux one would "linuxserver:/var/log/httpd # grep bigassfile.zip access_log"

When you are coming close to quota, change the permissions on the file so no one can download it.

I don't do Windows IIS but they have a log file too and the Windows Resource Kit or Visual Studio.NET will provide a means to "grep".

My philosophy Linux was meant to serve (including Xwindows), and Windows is meant to be a simple client. I really wish MS would have put Remote Xwindows and not Remote Desktop feature into XP... =)

HockeyFan

Wolverine · Post by **Wolverine** » Fri Sep 06, 2002 3:13 pm

VERY cool trick Jackrabbit! Jerry, Do you think the problem may come from more traffic on your site? I for one was on it QUITE frequently when I was trying to decide on which body type I wanted, and downloaded some pictures, for side by side comparisons. I believe that the more people who discover this forum looking for answers on RD's the more traffic your likely to have. You have a very nice site.

Post by **Jerry** » Fri Sep 06, 2002 9:08 pm

I'm running about 7 GIG per month... I have a 2 gig limit... but I also have like 6 sites with eddie... or about 12 GIG of combined bandwidth. Ny other sites get almost no traffic at all... so it hasn't cost me anythng.

Sometime this winter if/when I get time... I'll do some sort of rewrite... minimize the hell out of it... and offer a "full version" on CD.

That way... bandwidth goes down... and... golly gee... I might even break even.

Jerry