I am running into an issue where my web code is invoking an ajax call to another endpoint on the same server that is not completing. I can see in the server logs that the request is processed and the response is sent, but the network tool shows the response as not finished (stalled) even after several minutes.
I am looking for more details on what is happening in the proxy (perhaps it is waiting on more data from the server, etc). But I cannot find any logging from the proxy to assist in debugging.
EDIT:
I have noticed this happens on all proxy requests with isXhr set.
OK, so to answer the original question regarding verbose logging, there isn't any. I had to sprinkle logging through the hammerhead code to get anything more meaningful than testcafe timing out on a selector.
Regarding the underlying issue (which would have been obvious long ago with decent proxy logging), I finally uncovered a node.js http module "Parse Error". While the browsers are more forgiving, node's http module will barf on a Content-Length header along with 'Transfer-Encoding : chunked'. Chunked encoding creats additional overhead and the Content-Length does not match the payload size any longer.
This would normally not have happened, but in our server implementation, the API calls are proxied and the far end headers were being passed on to the response leading to a collision in the headers.
Hopefully this will be useful for someone else.
You need to inspect the RequestPipeline module. It controls the procedures of sending the request, processing the response, and sending the modified response to the client.
Via Firefox, if I do a GET text/html request to my web app, I get a 200 response back, and then Firefox sends 3 more of the same request right afterward. All return 200s. Does anyone know what would cause this?
*Some other observations about the issue:
In Firebug's network tab, only one request shows up. I can only see the extra requests using Tamper Data or another tool that sees the Http requests sent from my browser.
This issue does not happen in prior versions of my web app. When I compare the responses that get returned by the two different versions of the web app, I can't see anything that would cause this issue (but then, I really don't know what to look for). The responses are identical except for the web app's cookies, which are different.
This issue happens with JavaScript enabled or disabled.
Something similar is happening with Chrome, though it seems to be sending only 2 extra requests.
I don't see any browser redirects in the Html header.
This is only happening with text/html requests, not css requests, for example.
All 4 responses returned seem to have the complete Html page in the body, and they also have the cookie that the web app uses.
In Tamper Data, the 'Load Flags' column (whatever that is) says the following: First request is VALIDATE_ALWAYS_LOAD_DOCUMENT_URI LOAD_INITIAL_DOCUMENT_URI; second and third requests are LOAD_NORMAL; fourth request is LOAD_FROM_CACHE VALIDATE_NEVER
I don't see it happening with POSTs
It does not happen when the response is a 302.
If I go into the firefox config and set network.http.max-connections-per-server to 1, then Firefox only sends one request (the issue does not occur). (I don't think I can ask all our users to do that. :-))
*Why this issue is a problem:
This site has been around a long time and wasn't designed for this behavior. It's probably not going to go well.
(edited to add new findings)
Every once in a while I have to debug cross-origin resource sharing related problems during web-development.
To my testing, Chrome and Firefox give virtually no information when they cancel a request due to a CORS violation. Usually debugging involes checking the all the headers against specs, reading the CORS standard etc. It is a really cumbersome process.
Isn't there a way to tell any Browser that it should be more verbose about why it canceled a specific request?
For example, I rather have more verbose debug messages like Request canceled due to missing X-Requested-With field in received Access-Control-Allow-Headers field or Request canceled because supplied Origin: and received Access-Control-Allow-Origin: fields mismatch.
Which version of Chrome are you using? The latest versions have become much better at reporting CORS issues. For example, I am using Chrome version "32.0.1700.14 beta", and when I visit this page, I get the following error in my console:
Request header field X-Foo is not allowed by Access-Control-Allow-Headers.
This information is only available from the console, and cannot be programmatically accessed. Hopefully more browsers will follow suit. Note that if your request fails for some other, non-CORS reason, you may still see unhelpful error messages.
While browsers still aren't very helpful here, I recently built a webpage that can tell you exactly what's going on, and why, and exactly how to fix it. It's effectively an interactive self-explaining flowchart of the whole CORS system.
If you're stuck trying to debug your CORS setup, try it out: https://httptoolkit.tech/will-it-cors/
I am trying to make cross-domain requests with Safari on Windows. My Safari version is 5.1.2.
This is a classical question. I read in many places that Chrome and Safari allows cross domain requests as long as Server responds with the followin header in the response
Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *
I have read this post.
How to allow cross-domain requests in Safari?
and many others on the stackoverflow site too.
However, none of them answers my question.
I am having problems with Chrome AND Safari doing cross-domain AJAX requests even though I am sending the necessary header back from the server.
I finally ran Chrome with "--disable-web-security". Then it worked.
My questions:
1) What do I do with Safari? Do I use a similar command line argument?
2) More importantly, can I someone please tell me whether cross-domain functionality is allowed in Chrome and Safari by default as long as server responds with the header or do I have to make sure that
a) server responds with a header
AND
b) browser is started with a proper argument.
I found the problem. Reading more about CORS helped html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/cors. I realized that my requests were triggering preflight requests (OPTIONS) and the server was not set up to handle these requests properly. The reason it was causing preflight requests was because I was using JQuery and it was adding a custom header into my requests. I modified my code to prevent addition of this extra header and my requests no longer needed preflight requests. Now I do not have to disable web security and it works fine.
A customer sometimes sends POST requests with Content-Length: 0 when submitting a form (10 to over 40 fields).
We tested it with different browsers and from different locations but couldn't reproduce the error. The customer is using Internet Explorer 7 and a proxy.
We asked them to let their system administrator see into the problem from their side. Running some tests without the proxy, etc..
In the meantime (half a year later and still no answer) I'm curious if somebody else knows of similar problems with a Content-Length: 0 request. Maybe from inside some Windows network with a special proxy for big companies.
Is there a known problem with Internet Explorer 7? With a proxy system? The Windows network itself?
Google only showed something in the context of NTLM (and such) authentication, but we aren't using this in the web application. Maybe it's in the way the proxy operates in the customer's network with Windows logins? (I'm no Windows expert. Just guessing.)
I have no further information about the infrastructure.
UPDATE: In December 2010 it was possible to inform one administrator about this, incl. links from the answers here. Contact was because of another problem which was caused by the proxy, too. No feedback since then. And the error messages are still there. I'm laughing to prevent me from crying.
UPDATE 2: This problem exists since mid 2008. Every few months the customer is annoyed and wants it to be fixed ASAP. We send them all the old e-mails again and ask them to contact their administrators to either fix it or run some further tests. In December 2010 we were able to send some information to 1 administrator. No feedback. Problem isn't fixed and we don't know if they even tried. And in May 2011 the customer writes again and wants this to be fixed. The same person who has all the information since 2008.
Thanks for all the answers. You helped a lot of people, as I can see from some comments here. Too bad the real world is this grotesque for me.
UPDATE 3: May 2012 and I was wondering why we hadn't received another demand to fix this (see UPDATE 2). Looked into the error protocol, which only reports this single error every time it happened (about 15 a day). It stopped end of January 2012. Nobody said anything. They must have done something with their network. Everything is OK now. From summer 2008 to January 2012. Too bad I can't tell you what they have done.
UPDATE 4: September 2015. The website had to collect some data and deliver it to the main website of the customer. There was an API with an account. Whenever there was a problem they contacted us, even if the problem was clearly on the other side. For a few weeks now we can't send them the data. The account isn't available anymore. They had a relaunch and I can't find the pages anymore that used the data of our site. The bug report isn't answered and nobody complaint. I guess they just ended this project.
UPDATE 5: March 2017. The API stopped working in the summer of 2015. The customer seems to continue paying for the site and is still accessing it in February 2017. I'm guessing they use it as an archive. They don't create or update any data anymore so this bug probably won't reemerge after the mysterious fix of January 2012. But this would be someone else's problem. I'm leaving.
Internet Explorer does not send form fields if they are posted from an authenticated site (NTLM) to a non-authenticated site (anonymous).
This is feature for challange-response situations (NTLM- or Kerberos- secured web sites) where IE can expect that the first POST request immediately leads to an HTTP 401 Authentication Required response (which includes a challenge), and only the second POST request (which includes the response to the challange) will actually be accepted. In these situations IE does not upload the possibly large request body with the first request for performance reasons. Thanks to EricLaw for posting that bit of information in the comments.
This behavior occurs every time an HTTP POST is made from a NTLM authenticated (i.e. Intranet) page to a non-authenticated (i.e. Internet) page, or if the non-authenticated page is part of a frameset, where the frameset page is authenticated.
The work-around is either to use a GET request as the form method, or to make sure the non-authenticated page is opened in a fresh tab/window (favorite/link target) without a partly authenticated frameset. As soon as the authentication model for the whole window is consistent, IE will start to send form contents again.
Definitely related: http://www.websina.com/bugzero/kb/browser-ie.html
Possibly related: KB923155
Full Explanation: IEInternals Blog – Challenge-Response Authentication and Zero-Length Posts
This is easy to reproduce with MS-IE and an NTLM authentication filter on server side. I have the same issue with JCIFS (1.2.), struts 1. and MS-IE 6/7 on XP-SP2. It was finally fixed. There are several workarounds to make it up.
change form method from POST (struts default setting) to GET.
For most pages with small sized forms, it works well. Unfortunately i have possibly more than 50 records to send in HTTP stream back to server side. IE has a GET URL limit 2038 Bytes (not parameter length, but the whole URL length). So this is a quick workaround but not applicable for me.
send a GET before POST action executing.
This was recommended in MS-KB. My project has many legacy procedures and i would not take the risk at the right time. I have never tried this because it still needs some extra authentication processing when GET is received by filter layer based on my understanding from MS-KB and I would not like to change the behavior with other browsers, e.g. Firefox, Opera.
detecting if POST was sent with zero content-length (you may get it from header properties hash structure with your framework).
If so, trigger an NTLM authentication cycle by get challenge code from DC or cache and expect an NTLM response.
When the NTLM type2 msg is received and the session is still valid, you don't really need to authenticate the user but just forward it to the expected action if POST content-length is not zero. BTW, this would increase the network traffics. So check your cache life time setting and SMB session soTimeOut configuration before applying the change plz.
Or, more simple, you may just send a 401-unauthorized status to MS-IE and the browser shall send back POST request with data in reply.
MS-KB has provided a hot-fix with KB-923155 (I could not post more than one link because of a low reputation number :{ ) , but it seems not working. Would someone post a workable hot-fix here? Thanks :) Here is a link for reference, http://www.websina.com/bugzero/kb/browser-ie.html
We have a customer on our system with exactly the same problem. We've pin pointed it down to the proxy/firewall. Microsoft's IAS. It's stripping the POST body and sending content-length: 0. Not a lot we can do to work around however, and down want to use GET requests as this exposes usernames/passwords etc on the URL string. There's nearly 7,000 users on our system and only one with the problem... also only one using Microsoft IAS, so it has to be this.
There's a good chance the problem is that the proxy server in between implements HTTP 1.0.
In HTTP 1.0 you must use the Content-Length header field: (See section 10.4 here)
A valid Content-Length is required on
all HTTP/1.0 POST requests. An
HTTP/1.0 server should respond with a
400 (bad request) message if it cannot
determine the length of the request
message's content.
The request going into the proxy is HTTP 1.1 and therefore does not need to use the Content-Length header field. The Content-Length header is usually used but not always. See the following excerpt from the HTTP 1.1 RFC S. 14.13.
Applications SHOULD use this field to
indicate the transfer-length of the
message-body, unless this is
prohibited by the rules in section
4.4.
Any Content-Length greater than or
equal to zero is a valid value.
Section 4.4 describes how to determine
the length of a message-body if a
Content-Length is not given.
So the proxy server does not see the Content-Length header, which it assumes is absolutely needed in HTTP 1.0 if there is a body. So it assumes 0 so that the request will eventually reach the server. Remember the proxy doesn't know the rules of the HTTP 1.1 spec, so it doesn't know how to handle the situation when there is no Content-Length header.
Are you 100% sure your request is specifying the Content-Length header? If it is using another means as defined in section 4.4 because it thinks the server is 1.1 (because it doesn't know about the 1.0 proxy in between) then you will have your described problem.
Perhaps you can use HTTP GET instead to bypass the problem.
This is a known problem for Internet explorer 6, but not for 7 that I know of. You can install this fix for the IE6 KB831167 fix.
You can read more about it here.
Some questions for you:
Do you know which type of proxy?
Do you know if there is an actual body sent in the request?
Does it happen consistently every time? Or only sometimes?
Is there any binary data sent in the request? Maybe the data starts with a \0 and the proxy has a bug with binary data.
If the user is going through an ISA proxy that uses NTLM authentication, then it sounds like this issue, which has a solution provided (a patch to the ISA proxy)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/942638POST requests that do not have a POST body may be sent to a Web server that is published in ISA Server 2006
I also had a problem where requests from a customer's IE 11 browser had Content-Length: 0 and did not include the expected POST content. When the customer used Firefox, or Chrome the expected content was included in the request.
I worked out the cause was the customer was using a HTTP URL instead of a HTTPS URL (e.g. http://..., not https://...) and our application uses HSTS. It seems there might be a bug in IE 11 that when a request gets upgraded to HTTPS due to HSTS the request content gets lost.
Getting the customer to correct the URL to https://... resulted in the content being included in the POST request and resolved the problem.
I haven't investigated whether it is actually a bug in IE 11 any further at this stage.
Are you sure these requests are coming from a "customer"?
I've had this issue with bots before; they sometimes probe sites for "contact us" forms by sending blank POST requests based on the action URI in FORM tags they discover during crawling.
Presence and possible values of the ContentLength header in HTTP are described in the HTTP ( I assume 1/1) RFC:
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.13
In HTTP, it SHOULD be sent whenever the message's length can be determined prior to being transferred
See also:
If a message is received with both a
Transfer-Encoding header field and a Content-Length header field,
the latter MUST be ignored.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.4
Maybe your message is carrying a Transfer-Encoding header?
Later edit: also please note "SHOULD" as used in the RFC is very important and not equivalent to "MUST":
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
Ref: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
We had a customer using same website in anonymous and NTLM mode (on different ports). We found out that in our case the 401 was related to Riverbed Steelhead application used for http optimization. The first signal pointing us into that direction was a X-RBT-Optimized-By header. The issue was the Gratuitous 401 feature:
This feature can be used with both per-request and per-connection
authentication but it‘s most effective when used with per-request
authentication. With per-request authentication, every request must be
authenticated against the server before the server would serve the
object to the client. However, most browsers do not cache the server‘s
response requiring authentication and hence it will waste one
round-trip for every GET request. With Gratuitous 401, the client-side
Steelhead appliance will cache the server response and when the client
sends the GET request without any authentication headers, it will
locally respond with a ―401 Unauthorized‖ message and therefore saving
a round trip. Note that the HTTP module does not participate in the
actual authentication itself. What the HTTP module does is to inform
the client that the server requires authentication without requiring
it to waste one round trip.
Google also shows this as an IE (some versions, anyway) bug after an https connection hits the keepalive timeout and reconnects to the server. The solution seems to be configuring the server to not use keepalive for IE under https.
Microsoft's hotfix for KB821814 can set Content-Length to 0:
The hotfix that this article describes implements a code change in Wininet.dll to:
Detect the RESET condition on a POST request.
Save the data that is to be posted.
Retry the POST request with the content length set to 0. This prevents the reset from occurring and permits the authentication process to complete.
Retry the original POST request.
curl sends PUT/POST requests with Content-Length: 0 when configured to use HTTP proxy. It's trick to overcome required buffering in case of first unauthorized PUT/POST request to proxy. In case of GET/HEAD requests curl simply repeats the query. The scheme for PUT/POST is like:
Send first PUT/POST request with Content-Length set to 0.
Get answer. HTTP status code of 407 means we have to use proxy
authorization. Prepare headers for proxy authentication for send request.
Send request again with filled headers for proxy authentication and real data to POST/PUT.