AdGuard Assistant trying to access a website when it's disabled

randomusername

Beta Tester
On one of my websites I disabled the Adguard Assistant entirely.
Here's an example page: http://gamersirc.net/2015/04/01/eine-kurze-verzoegerung/

However, the logs say the Assistant tries to access the page...

Code:
[22-Feb-2016 21:45:13 UTC] /adguard-ajax-api/api?type=gm-get-value&unique_name=Adguard%20Assistant%20Beta&variable_key=settings&sn=(some long string)
I'm not sure why it does that, but my server comes back with 4 (!) 404 messages per site call... (well, naturally).

I use the newest Windows beta as of today.
 

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
I am 100% sure the HTML page is cached in your browser, just check the HTTP status, it will be 304 Not Modified. So, the page code is cached along with "scripts" linking to Assistant code. As it is disabled, it should return 404, but it seems that Assistant code is also cached and here we are, Assistant is trying to access its settings.
 

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Wouldn't it make sense to not cache the Assistant then?
Then you'll get a 404 error anyway when browser will try to load assistant's code.

The question is why the cache was not suppressed by us after you have disabled Assistant on that page (it should has been suppressed on first page reload).

How exactly have you disabled Assistant?
 

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Hm, I don't know if this is a cause or not, but I see that there is a bug in our code and there are some 404 errors even when Assistant is enabled.
 

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Hooray! Let me know when I can try it.
Should be good in today's beta version.

The problem is that we don't yet support HTTP/2 and you use it on that website.

This is the first time I see HTTP/2 over TCP, usually everybody use HTTP/2 over TLS which is downgraded to HTTP/1.1 by us.

We plan to implement H2 support by the end of this year.
 

randomusername

Beta Tester
I did not know that (I don't have root access to that server), but I'm glad to see that the provider obviously cares for modern technologies. :D
Thank you! I'll try it when I'm back home.
 
Top