03:26:01qw3rty_ joins
03:29:35qw3rty__ quits [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
09:13:50<jodizzle>Another candidate shortener: http://ewar.ren/Colbert (from here: https://twitter.com/TeamWarren/status/1233244510064345088)
13:50:08<phuzion>That one is run by rebrand.ly
18:28:37<jodizzle>phuzion: How can you tell, out of curiosity?
18:29:07<phuzion>jodizzle: ping the domain, find the IP, then nslookup the IP.
18:29:43<phuzion>[phuzion@vps01 ~]$ host ewar.ren
18:29:43<phuzion>ewar.ren has address 52.72.49.79
18:29:43<phuzion>[phuzion@vps01 ~]$ nslookup 52.72.49.79
18:29:43<phuzion>79.49.72.52.in-addr.arpa name = visit.rebrand.ly.
18:30:10<jodizzle>Got it, thanks.
18:30:21<jodizzle>Does the fact that it's run by rebrand.ly matter for urlteam's goals?
18:31:43<jodizzle>As in, does it affect how we would decide to implement scraping of the shortener?
18:31:45<phuzion>Ultimately not, but it's useful to know. For some URL shorteners, we have custom code to handle certain edge cases. I don't think we do for rebrand.ly though
18:31:54<jodizzle>Ah, okay
18:32:50<@JAA>Some shorteners use the same codes across the entire platform. Most notably, that's the case on bit.ly and all the millions of aliases.
18:33:25<phuzion>In other words, if bit.ly also runs bob.ly, bit.ly/foobar would be the same as bob.ly/foobar
18:33:47<@JAA>Yeah, and hence why we only scan bit.ly and basically don't care about the aliases except for documentation purposes.
18:34:15<@JAA>(Custom codes aren't shared on bit.ly, but those can't be bruteforced anyway.)
18:34:48<phuzion>JAA: Just curious, since I'm a tracker admin, would it be reasonable for me to get +o in here?
18:35:09<@JAA>It would, and I just thought the same thing. :-)
18:35:22<phuzion>Hah, nice.
18:35:46<@JAA>Hmm
18:35:51<@JAA>Oh yeah, NOSYNC and no VERBOSE.
18:35:57@ChanServ sets mode: +o phuzion
20:05:35systwi_ quits [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:06:06systwi (systwi) joins
21:52:10atphoenix quits [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:52:36atphoenix joins