X

Aggregator

CodeSOD: A Little Twisted

The Daily WTF
1 month 3 weeks ago

Dana sends us a WTF that'll turn your head. She was shopping for new hard drives, and was doing it from her phone, a fairly reasonable tool to use for online shopping these days. She opened the website of one vendor, and it was rotated 90 degrees. Or half-pi radians, for those of us that are more used to sensible units.

This was irrespective of any rotation settings on her phone, the website insisted on showing itself in landscape mode. This created quite the unusual appearance when she held her phone in portrait orientation: the browser chrome surrounding the content was in portrait mode, but the page itself was in landscape.

Obviously, this is a terrible design choice. But Dana wanted to know more. So she started digging in. There was no sign of this behavior on a desktop, which sure, I'd hope not. Attempting to use wget to download the page caused a 403. Using curl downloaded a JavaScript challenge. Fine, they didn't want bots, but Dana wasn't a bot.

Poking around in the network tab of the desktop browser's debugging tools helped Dana learn a few things. First: the line endings in the files were all CRLF, implying that all development happened on Windows machines. Maybe that's not interesting, but in 2026, it feels unusual. Second, the page is setting a PHPSESSID cookie, so clearly the backend is written in PHP. But most important, Dana is able to piece together what she needs to successfully use curl to download the page, once pretending to be a desktop browser, and once pretending to be a mobile browser. With that, she ran a diff to see what changed.

The desktop version started with 42 blank lines. The mobile version started with 41. The rest of the pages were substantially the same, with two exceptions. First, the mobile page also added a stylesheet called stylesheet-responsive.css. I assume that name was chosen because irony is dead; nothing about this site is responsive. Second, there was a subtle difference in the body tags.

You see, both pages had a body tag like this:

<body marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" topmargin="0" bottommargin="0" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

But the mobile page, continued from there:

<!-- header //--> <body id="landscape_mode_only" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" topmargin="0" bottommargin="0" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

Yes, the mobile version has two body tags.

Dana writes:

Even though I don't have access to the real PHP source-code, I can imagine what it looks like.

Somewhere in that PHP source-code there is browser-detection (or rather browser-sniffing) and that toggles if it should serve a slightly different HTML code to the user. I do not want to work for that website, I do not want to look at that backend source-code. And I have to feel sorry and respect for the browser developers, as they have to write software that can handle completely broken HTML.

While I hate the results, the fact that the HTML specification originally required clients to render even the most broken HTML is arguably a really good design choice. Expecting people to do the right thing never works out for you.

Let's not forget their "responsive" CSS, which is obviously worth looking at, even if it's obvious what it must be:

@media only screen and (orientation:portrait) { #landscape_mode_only { height:98vw; -webkit-transform:rotate(90deg); -moz-transform:rotate(90deg); -o-transform:rotate(90deg); -ms-transform:rotate(90deg); transform:rotate(90deg) } }

This forces everything in the body to rotate sideways.

Look, actually responsive design is hard. But "just force the page into landscape mode no matter what the user does" is definitely not the solution.

And Dana points out one last thing:

As a cherry on the top, observe how the comment that marks the end of the header is placed after the <body> starts. Which is wrong already, but also stupid, because </head> already marks the end of the head. And the head is not really the header.

[Advertisement] BuildMaster allows you to create a self-service release management platform that allows different teams to manage their applications. Explore how!
Remy Porter

FSF Threatens Anthropic Over Infringed Copyright: Share Your LLMs Freely

Slashdot
1 month 3 weeks ago
In 2024 Anthropic was sued over claims it infringed copyrights when training LLMs. But as they try to settle, they may have a problem. The Free Software Foundation announced Friday that Anthropic's training data apparently even included the book "Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software" — for which the Free Software Foundation holds a copyright. It was published by O'Reilly and by the FSF under the GNU Free Documentation License (GNU FDL). This is a free license allowing use of the work for any purpose without payment. Obviously, the right thing to do is protect computing freedom: share complete training inputs with every user of the LLM, together with the complete model, training configuration settings, and the accompanying software source code. Therefore, we urge Anthropic and other LLM developers that train models using huge datasets downloaded from the Internet to provide these LLMs to their users in freedom. We are a small organization with limited resources and we have to pick our battles, but if the FSF were to participate in a lawsuit such as Bartz v. Anthropic and find our copyright and license violated, we would certainly request user freedom as compensation. "The FSF doesn't usually sue for copyright infringement," reads the headline on the FSF's announcement, "but when we do, we settle for freedom."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid