Your work looks good indeed: big ol’ button, going to Google, no history going back. My only concern is about the position of this emergency button. I feel like it would make more sense to have it at the bottom of the page, mainly for two reasons: – it would be less visible for anyone in the room, since our shoulders mostly hide the bottom of the screen. – it would be easier to click since we read from the top to the bottom, and we use to place the mouse on the bottom part of the screen while scrolling. What do you think?
- Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac Download
- Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac 2017
- Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac 2016
What about having the button just change the textual content of the current sensitive page to something benign, like pulling in text from a wikipedia article on headaches or something. By changing the text, the appearance of the website would be a less drastic change when clicking the button, so less likely for someone else to “notice” the rapid change.
You could combine that with a “History API” type URL change, that changes the content portion of the URL to something more benign. The domain couldn’t be changed, but at least the content part could seem to match the benign content displayed. And it’s also similarly resistant to “back button”. Quickfile 1.0 free download for mac.
I understand the importance of this case, and don’t mean to make light of it, but it does strike me that similar techniques can be used in cases like sports sites during March Madness, etc. There are already many “boss button” techniques like this, so perhaps we can take inspiration from them. Nice thoughts, Chris. It’s interesting timing, as I just ran across this feature for the first time on a the site of a NY organization I was learning about. It looks like their solution was implemented a long time ago, because the script no longer works (although it does successfully push you to a new web site, so the core feature still works), but it looks like the original concept was to both open a new window with Google in it, and remove all content from the original page by literally removing it from the DOM.
As you say, this does nothing to prevent a refresh or back action, but I like the concept: if opening a new window is a suspicious activity, do your best to destroy the contents of the original window. I think a hidden, full-screen iframe would do the trick as opposed to redirection or new tabs. You suffer from the momentary white screen with a new tab.
Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac Download
Instead, you could have a hidden iframe in the background, you could have javascript quickly hit 3 different urls. Then, keeping the same “Go” button and hot keys, the iframe would appear and would mask the entire site. The iframe would already have content loaded taking care of the white screen issue. It would also have 3 pages of history – taking care of any back button issues. Only problem here is the URL bar:( I could also make a weak argument that if you are going to teach a user hotkeys, you could go ahead and teach them CTRL + W, or ALT + TAB, or CTRL + TAB. The fastest way I can think of to change the content of the page would be to use a hidden iframe pointed to a Google image search or something. Clicking the button would then make the iframe visible instantly, since the page would already be loaded.
The main drawback here is that the original url would still be in the address bar, so I think that the other techniques you mentioned should be used as well. As a bonus, I believe (haven’t tested) the iframe part of the page would remain visible in the browser history. If that’s true, you could add an onclick handler to all links on the page to show the iframe before the browser follows the link, which would disguise the contents in history. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I’m assuming a worst case scenario, so some of these ideas could probably be seen as overkill.
INITIAL PAGE WARNING First and foremost, there should clear message to the user that they should.NOT. be viewing the site if there is a risk of them being discovered. It should also give clear instructions on how to browse privately in the detected browser. IFRAMES Have the main site be relatively obscure (heck, it could even go under the guise of a weather site to keep with the examples). The main content of the site sits within an iframe. This should ensure that no history entries are added if the user does not have the ability (or ignores the warning) to browse privately. CLICKJACKING FOR GOOD Any click within a specific threshold for a normal click triggers the “safety screen”.
To navigate (again, this would have to be communicated to the user), the user must press and hold for a little bit longer to trigger an actual navigation. If possible, build the site as a single page that requires as few clicks as possible. SCREENSAVER MODE If no keyboard or mouse interaction occurs within a few seconds, automatically trigger the safety screen. Add a slightly longer delay that will automatically navigate to a harmless site like Google after a minute or so of inactivity. Why not have mouse-over sections that turn on the safety mechanism, then click on an “advert” (isn’t actually an advert) to turn it off.
Bonus points if the advert has an easter egg indicating it’s for the SARA site, e.g., a family playing badminton while wearing SARA t-shirts. This works because most people don’t click on poorly targeted advertisements, if they click at all. Microsoft word 2018 crack. For a women’s support line, use a tampon advert so men feel uncomfortable clicking on it. For a men’s support line, use something no woman would be likely to click. Children, LGBT, and other situations should use this same tactic.
First attempt at the demo page took a few seconds before actually doing anything. I don’t usually visit weather.com, so I can only guess that it wasn’t on my DNS cache.
That or my Firefox just lagged without further reason. If my theory on DNS is right, you would have a similar issue on slow connections. And if we’re talking about people who fear for themselves if caught, it’s probably a good idea to do something client-side before opening an external page. Perhaps clearing/hiding all the content on the current page? The goal is not to be caught. So the real need is not to close the window (a typical rookie/technical guy mistake) but to hide where the user was.
A simple parse of the history array to the last non-same-actual-domain-name entry and do a history.go(-X). Most browsers will do this more quickly than showing something else.
If nothing in the history array (user knew the URL and did went right to it), then open Google.com homepage. This is the page the browser has to most chance to have in cache.
Closing the window would end to the last opened window, which could be another website window about domestical abuse too. Or even worse, the desktop which would be highly suspicious to (most of) paranoid abusers.
If you really want a bulletproof solution, just keep a 1px height iframe on top with Google.com opened in it with a generic keyword. Any script could resize it to full window height. After 2 seconds, refresh to a Google Search (to the same keywords) targetting parent. You may be able to do it using: window.parent.location = 'This would be the very best solution (stay in the same page) since a CTRL+W or any script closing the window could lead to a prompt alert (when a post has been submitted or anything). And if you are scared Javascript could get slow, just put a huge button on top in position: fixed; and tell your user to always keep his/her mouse pointer on it while reading. And link it to the Google Search (that you open in a 1px iframe anyway so it’s already in cache).
Lets look at the UI perspective of the normal physiological “startle response” — Many people browse with their finger on the mouse button – so, especially if they were on the “lookout” for intruders, that could get to be a useful habit if they know about the alt-exit. But, moving the mouse first to the button and then the “letting go” of the button (i.e. Due to the “button up” usage – just seems a bit non-intuitive for someone being startled by an intruder.
Wish there were a better way to use the ‘startle response.’ “You startled me” is a lot easier to explain than a noticed page change due to delayed mouse up. The reader could force themselves to leave the mouse over the green button; but still. Also, the location of the escape button isn’t at all conducive to either a startle response or obfuscation of your movements. Reaching up an over). If it were me watching out for intruders I would suggest a key on the bottom row like the space or alt or control – that you could “take over” for the clandestine part of the exercise but revert back to normal usage on a “normal” exit from the page. A quick press of the thumb on the space or alt is intuitive in a “startle response.” I’m assuming merely ‘reading’ wouldn’t require the space button, but filling in a form might. Would also suggest a pop-up or large info banner at the top which could be scrolled past on entrance to the page — i.e.
Not rely on a tiny info button at the bottom which could be missed. Here is an idea to reduce the DNS time especially if the site hasn’t been visited before perhaps find a way to pre-cache the “boss” site upon loading of the main site?
Perhaps load the site in a hidden iframe somewhere that way it’s cached on the PC ready for the switch over?? ANOTHER OPTION: Depending on the URL of the website in question, perhaps the go button could replace the content on the screen with a fake news website? Use a simple hide/show javascript command to hide all divs on screen and show a pre built fake news layout (stored in a hidden div). I really like this idea Alex, I’m not sure why no one’s really picked up on it. It is possible to track mouse movements (I found a javascript example at ), the problem of course would be creating a function that took those and detected a “shake” (is one dramatic x coordinate increase and decrease or should several be required to count as a single “shake”, or maybe it should use the y coordinate?). But I don’t think it’d be incredibly hard, the advantage would be that nothing would have to be clicked or pressed. I’ve been thinking a little about how to avoid clicking the “back” button and returning to the abuse website.
I came up with a potential solution, that actually stems from javascript blocking content from loading. Since Javascript prevents other things from loading, why not use this to set and check session storage? This is what I’m thinking: 1.
You visit the site, and have javascript at the top of the page (NOT in an onload function). This javascript sets Session Storage. to let the browser know it has visited this site already.
You do your initial redirect solution (locationchange) 4. If the browser returns to that page, it checks for your session storage – if it exists – it does location change to another harmless site. Since the javascript blocks loading, it SHOULD prevent the end user from seeing anything. session storage which lasts for the duration the browser is open. You may want to load content in/make visible AFTER the session storage check anyways Note that this will probably still show the original URL on hitting the back button, you may want to make your URL something somewhat ambiguous.
Also, this solution should be used in conjunction with other solutions, as well as inform the user of what will happen. Tell them they must CLOSE the browser and return to the page if they wish to visit again. Yes, this causes more work for the user, but it also makes it safer in my opinion.
I was going to suggest the use of a keystroke, so I was glad to see you thought of this at the end of the article. Nicely put together. I never thought about this sort of issue. What about the possibility of over writing the page with dummy content or another site (through an iframe?) that’s been preloaded? I’m thinking out loud, but it would be instant, and not require suspicious closing/opening tabs. However, the back button might cause some issues, unless the AJAXy stuff you mentioned could take affect. Another idea, on click of the Go button, set a cookie that blocks or redirects users to a benign page for the next hour so that the perp can’t access the site.
That may look bad, but something like a false 404/503 might help that. Random ideas off the top of my head. Awesome to see this stuff worked on. Great post once again. Most of the solutions involved clicking on a button. Like others mentioned before, this is in my opinion simply too difficult on panic mode. What about the opposite?
Hover a button to display the right text. Allow two versions of the site. The “incognito” and the “normal” version where nothing happens. By making two versions, you can also make sure that robots see the normal one avoiding to harm your well-deserved SEO. Moving the mouse away from an area is by far the easiest and safest action the user could take. How many of you stare at Google’s home page? How many of them do you think have their hands on keyboard while reading to quickly hit the ESC key?
I was thinking, along the line of some others already, where are the users hands normally? At the very least, they will have a hand on the mouse. So, what’s an easy thing to do, that will require little obvious movement, but isn’t a normal thing to do. Not sure I’m a fan of double click, since that MIGHT be something needed for other functionality, depending on page In any case, I’ve implemented a Left-Right click combo, and a triple Left. Check it out on this.
It’s setup in a JS library type thing as well. Just does some output to indicate the triggers at the moment, but it’s just a start for others to adapt from.
This might be too involved, but if it means saving a life You can’t clear the history, but what if you just dumped enough stuff into the history to make it seem like someone was doing research on something generic? Maybe headaches like another commenter mentioned. You could redirect to another site with a non-suspecting URL and use history.pushState to dump like 25 URLs onto the history stack and eventually jump out to a WikiPedia article or something. The idea being, hopefully when a bad guy sees wikipedia he doesn’t feel threatened, but even if he sits down and hits the back button it just takes him to another page with a link to wikipedia on it or whatever. I’m not sure what the best number would be – 10 probably floods out the recent history by holding the back button, but you can’t dump too many that it becomes unreasonable. Maybe you could keep track of how long they were on the site for and dump a reasonable amount of stuff on the history stack accordingly. I love the group effort on this one.
I feel like together we can come up with something pretty awesome that every site like this should use. Not a technical solution, but a design point to check: the redirect website should match as much as possible this domestic abuse one in term of background colors and image sizes (the opposite might be easier). It wouldn’t make a difference in day light, but if the user is checking the website at night in a dark room, the screen will emit enough light that a change from a dark themed / large dark pictures website to the google home page will be noticeable to someone entering the room. A sudden change of lighting can look suspicious and cause trouble. I would test the switch at night in a bedroom with no light, with the screen turned around, after having waited a minute for my eyes to get accustomed to this lighting.
As Josh said above, great group effort. Looking forward to see where it leads to. From a design point of view it may make more sense for the big obvious button to run down the left side of the page. For the same reason the Mac has the mile high menu bar, it’s easier to slam the mouse against the side of the screen (when the window is maximized) than the bottom of the screen, where the user would have to move up to avoid clicking the task bar. The left side is chosen to avoid the scrollbar. Additionally almost every monitor purchased these days seems to be widescreen. Rather than take away space from the bottom of the page where we are already space limited, remove it from the side of the page where we have a surplus of space because making text more than about 72 characters wide (10-11 words) makes it harder to read.
The hardest part I think would be masking the URL. I thought of the same idea of just hiding/replacing the content of the site with something that looks like Google for instance. There are ways to prevent the back button from immediately going back to the previous page — have you been on any ad filled websites? I’m speaking ASP logic here, but if you do some Postbacks on a timed interval clicking back would just bring you to the previous Postback (which would be the same page). I’m not sure what the PHP equivalent of it is.
You know, thinking about it, why don’t you have the button hide/replace the content, redirect the user to a “safe page” with that same content, and map the safe page to something inconspicous in.htaccess combined with the timed mini-postbacks on an interval? I honestly think ASP.NET might be better in this situation.
Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac 2017
I can’t remember, but there might be a way to redirect the URL without changing the content you have on the page. At the very least, the routing and postbacks would help a lot. This is truly amazing. This is what it is all about: a community of liked minded individuals coming together to help solve a problem for the greater good.
Awesome awesome stuff. Please keep it up. As others have already coded stuff perhaps the creation of something on Github? At the moment I can only contribute ideas and I don’t think github is meant for that. =) My thoughts so far: – the concern about the URL is a valid one, but I think the best solution for that part of the functionality truly rests with the company/service/organization/etc. By this I mean that registering some generic domain that they could use for their most sensitive and important information.
The ‘official’ website would be a proper domain name so people can find them easily, but from there a redirect takes them to the generic domain and any of the other ideas regarding how best to serve the content could be utilized. That’s it so far. Please please please keep this momentum going.
“Man becomes great exactly in the degree in which he works for the welfare of his fellow-men.” – Gandhi Cheers, Jonesy. I have 2 propositions to enhance the trick. First, instead of redirecting to the same fake website, just pick a random one in a predefined array.
If the victim has to come back and escape again. It can be suspicious to be on a weather website twice in day for example. Then, to improve the switch speed, preload the “fake” website in a hidden iframe to grab every cachable resources. If you choose a decent fake website, you’ll probably have to only download the html.
Window.location.href Stopped Working Recently On Excel For Mac 2016
The loading won’t be visible and we might believe the victim was already browsing this fake page for a while. Good post and nice discussion too. I wonder wether we should be considereing the behaviour of the user after this button has been activated? I mean, when I clicked the demo panic button I had no idea what was in store and that put me in an unconfortable position.
So, if I was a real user and my abusive partner walked in asking “What you looking at?” I’m sure my repsone would have been immediately suspicious. To solve this would it be wise to ask the user if they wish to specify an exit site when they first land. On panic, they can be redirected to a familiar page that they know and one that is comfortable. Could this not allow the browser to preload/cache the content too for a super quick page load.
The files may well be already cached if it’s a frequently visited site. The main problem with going to other websites by clicking or pressing a button or using AJAX to dynamically load content is that the process may take a long time. Specially if you are downloading stuff or are using a modem (some people in the rural areas have no other choice). I think the best way is; to enable private browsing and attach an event to the escape key to dynamically change the whole page with CSS and jQuery only (hiding/removing elements and showing other elements). Showing a bogus recipe page would be nice. The user can press the escape key repeatedly to act as if they are frustrated why the page is not loading properly. The first press of the escape key will alter the page instantly and the subsequent presses will do nothing.
If we set a cookie that expires, we can prevent the reloading of the original page when page refresh is clicked. Would that work? First off, I think this post is REALLY awesome and it’s totally cool to see people put their heads together with the thought and sensitivity to a subject like this. These types of changes to a site really make a difference in a person’s life! AWESOME READ It would be really neat to maybe allow the person to enter their preferred backout site when they first land on the page.
I mean, if someone who knows me walked by and I had the weather channel page up, they would immediately be suspicious. But if i had LOLCats up, wouldn’t be suspicious at all.
Entering your preferred back out link right when you get there would be really REALLY easy to implement too. Eh, mobile is easy compared to dial-up friendly. It’s nigh impossible to design something lightweight, small (file size), legacy-compliant, and modern-looking. Dial-up users also aren’t likely to use the latest browsers since all their time online would then be spent updating. Testing a design for dial-up users essentially limits us to using IE6, Safari, and maybe Firefox 3.x. To reiterate, it’ll need to be XHTML1.1 and CSS2 compliant according to IE’s terms. One should also sprite as many images as possible, or at least ensure descriptive image placeholders.
Not unless you can download it and only if it has its file size listed. This seems like a bit much to undertake. Wouldn’t an offline solution be better at that point? If not perhaps a separate, light-weight site with the same content? User-agents that aren’t on a whitelist could be directed there, of course with a link to escape the lightweight redirect. Redirecting is bad. What if the target site is slow or the internet connection is lost or a DNS server is on fire.
No redirecting. Instead of going to a new site, it’s better to simply mask what’s currently displayed by using a full-page overlay or something.
To minimize detection of any visual changes, either use the same colors and brightness levels, or use a dissolve transition. If you need to load extra resources in order for the “Panic!” page to show, make sure to load those resources when you serve the page for the VERY FIRST TIME so that they’ll be available instantly.
(Remember to set the caching policy very far into the future for these items.) If the browser is modern enough, you can use the HTML History API to wipe/modify the history. One should also change the window title to complete the effect. To change the domain, you can use javascript to rewrite the location bar’s contents without loading the page. Using javascript and iframes, cache the contents of a wikipedia page upon load, then the panic button would do 3 things: – have the iframe encompass the entire screen, – rewrite the location bar contents to reflect the iframe’s URL (without loading the new page), – Erase the history using the API you mentioned.
This way a person can immediately show the new page without an added request when in a dangerous situation. The only vulnerability is if they use the reload button, it would show the un-panicked page. I stumbled on this by accident, and I know it’s now over a year old, however I like a lot of what has been said here and had some thoughts of my own. I’m not a web dev, I’m just an artist. However from what I know about websites, I know that cookies are stored.
Would it not be possible to say that if they hit the back button, and the site saw the cookie for it’s own website, it would instead of reloading itself redirect to google? Next would be to clear history at the moment they enter the site. Perhaps even a warning saying that it will do so, and if they say no then don’t I guess. “This website will clear your web history to keep you safe, is this ok? Yes no” This requester should be near the bottom of the screen (as mentioned above, viewers body blocks that area).
This then removes history provides previous history as google if possible. Current page will appear to be google search for chronic headaches. (we all worry about health when our bodies do something that isn’t normal) provides alibi. Real content exists at the bottom and is easily closed by clicking anywhere outside of it.
This should be made clear first thing. Scroll bar to right scrolls both content at the bottom, while also scrolling content at the top. This way if seen at a distance it appears they are using it, not staring a long time at static content. Advancing pages will advance fake search as well, (based on real google search content) Once page is clicked outside of the small content zone, it sends the user to a relevant site on headaches, and if back button is pressed, it redirects to 2nd page of google search on headaches, again, if possible. Downside is that they can’t go back to the site without deleting their cookies however at least they are safe. This info should be presented to them in the most efficient and clear manner possible. And as quickly as possible.
How to escape first, and how to get back right after that. Then continue with content.
Bottom right side should also have a panic button to notify police of the location if there is a problem. “call police”. The other downside is if their computer is locked down to prevent use of cookies. It could ask them to activate them to protect them. I’m out of ideas. To reliably prevent the “flash of old content” in Chrome when switching back to the inactive tab, I had to add a simple delay that allows to repaint the window plain white – a brief flash of white when switching tabs is not out of the ordinary.
$('html').css('display','none'); setTimeout(getAway, 50); // allow 50ms to hide the That said, I have found many of the suggested measures are not working reliably in modern browsers (any kind of history shenanigans) and browser vendors have every reason to continue and limit the ability to pull of this kind of trickery. This could well lead to a privacy/escape button that suggests safety but fails – the worst possible case. Providing a quick means of leaving the site is good, but educating the user upfront on privacy is of equal or greater importance. Browser tools offer a much greater level of protection when it comes to hiding activity/traces.
A very prominent notice and link to a tutorial on the matter should be displayed by default. For users that do not need it or the escape button, hiding it as a cookie based preference seems viable. As for the tutorial, I have seen many examples where users are struck by a wall of text describing a cookie/history reset for every major browser. User agent sniffing may be evil in most cases, but here it serves a good cause – I prefer to keep the technical mumbo-jumbo as concise as possible by making assumptions about the users browser (naturally, offering a fallback in case you’re guessing wrong is rarely a bad idea).
'Copy to clipboard' functionality is something we all use dozens of times daily but the client side API around it has always been lacking; some older APIs and browser implementations required a scary 'are you sure?' -style dialog before the content would be copied to clipboard - not great for usability or trust. About seven years back, a solution for copying content to the clipboard in a more novel way.and by novel way I mean using Flash. Hey - we all hate on Flash these days but functionality is always the main goal and it was quite effective for this purpose so we have to admit it was a decent solution. Years later we have a better, Flash-free solution:.
Top 10 free mac games. 01: Dream Chronicles 2 02: Miss Teri Tale 03: Escape the Museum 04: Dream Chronicles 05: Azada 06: Fairway Solitaire 07: Mystery Case Files: Madam Fate 08: Pet Pals Animal Doctor 09: The History Channel Lost Worlds 10: The Count of Monte Cristo. There are larger number of people which likes to play games and there are various games available on internet but Mac games are very interesting and Mac has various versions of games, here is a list of top ten best Mac Games as well as most popular in Mac games lover. I hope you will also like it.
I have an Excel hyperlink problem: I click on, let's say A1, copy the link in it ( right click on hyperlink and copy that SAME URL as the link (if it is not automatically detected and changed). When I go to click on it, I am redirected to If I copy and paste the link directly into the browser, it works fine (i.e., I am not redirected to a different URL). Does anyone know what's going on? I ran into the same problem with a URL that requires authentication. If you click from an Excel spreadsheet to a URL that requires you to be logged in to a cookie-based session, most sites will redirect the Microsoft Discovery Agent to a login page. Unless the site is smart enough to redirect the login page request back to the original request in the case that the user is already logged in, you end up being forced to log in manually once the page loads in your real browser. The user experience is that all links appear to be logged-out.
– Jul 10 '13 at 4:43. The URL you're using needs some more information from a cookie to display the search results rather than the search page.
Paste the URL into a different browser (or remove your cookies) and you'll get the same results. Clicking a URL in Excel seems to open it in your default browser. But that's not really true. Before opening it in your browser, Excel first runs. This uses a Windows/Internet Explorer component to determine if the URL works. (It does not identify itself as Internet Explorer, but as 'User Agent: Microsoft Office Existence Discovery'.) And if the results are (somehow) okay then it will open the result of that check in your default browser. Lacking the cookies (more precisely: lacking ), GoDaddy gives that Internet Explorer component.
And the result of that is opened in your default browser. That's the URL you're seeing. Most likely your default browser is not Internet Explorer? Then pasting the URL into IE directly and clicking it, to get the cookies, might then also make the link work from Excel. (Just for testing; it's not a permanent solution.) You will have more luck using a URL that does not rely on some hidden information from a cookie, like.
This is Excel fault. If you paste the link in Outlook email or WordPad and you open the link from there it will work correctly. Excel should never create hidden session to verify the hyperlink. What's the point of it. It just needs to open it, nothing else. They use the same logic in MS Word. It doesn't work from there neither.
When Excel tries to verify the link in the background, new session is created that is not authenticated so it gets redirected to login page or something. After that instead of opening the original URL in the browser, Excel is opening the redirection url.
They really know how to make simple thing complicated. Too much here to add as a comment I'm afraid.
The initial link returns a 302 status code From the: The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection might be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). If the 302 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. Note: RFC 1945 and RFC 2068 specify that the client is not allowed to change the method on the redirected request.
However, most existing user agent implementations treat 302 as if it were a 303 response, performing a GET on the Location field-value regardless of the original request method. The status codes 303 and 307 have been added for servers that wish to make unambiguously clear which kind of reaction is expected of the client. So as @xlm stated, this is GoDaddy doing a temporary redirect. It would seem that, when called from Excel, the redirect is not always being honoured. I had the same problem only the site I was going to included processing and retrieving data base on a date stamp. I would copy the url to a new cell.
Change the date. Click on the new url, BUT get the old url. However, if I ctl clicked on the new url cell, go up to the cell display window click my cursor anywhere in that window then click on a different cell the url date values change and clicking on the url gets me the right data. All this in IE.
It appears that when you copy the url it brings the url site info with it. Not sure what magic happens when I open the cell and don't alter it, but it changes the url when you put your pointer over it. I'm a regular magnet for this kind of stuff in Excel. Probably why I don't trust it.
I was able to investigate this further as I was trying to get an Excel workbook to link to my own web server. I noticed that clicking a link in Excel produced three queries to the server. GET HEAD (with temporary session). GET (with temporary session). GET (with real session) But if the linked page was redirecting the user I didn't see the third GET. Instead the second GET was redirected to a new page and the session remained temporary. Which means that if the target page requires authentication the user will be redirected to a login page even if he actually is already authenticated.
This lead me to an idea to create a landing page that redirects the user to the target page if the user is authenticated. And it works. When the third GET is received the server notices that the user is authenticated and redirects to the target page. For unauthenticated user the landing page shows a link to the target page.
And when the user clicks the link the user will be redirected to sign in page. We manage to reproduce the problem and our developer findings indicate when you paste a link into Microsoft Excel, Excel prefaces the link with a byte order mark (BOM). When this link is loaded in the browser, it does not remove the BOM from the URL. Upon loading the URL, the browser does several tests verify that the connection is secure (https) and this is failing due to the errant BOM. This ultimately causes the relay state error, since that parameter must be sent over a secure channel. You can reproduce this problem by copying the cell and pasting it directly into firefox, thereby taking Excel out of the picture.
This also fails (sometimes in a slightly different way) but suffers from the same root problem. If you remove the 'https' from the pasted URL and simply retype it, you will notice that the link now works correctly. This is a limitation in the fact that Excel stores the BOM in the URL, and the way in which the browser cannot interpret the BOM. At the moment the only workaround we could think of is copy the URL link and paste it over to the browser and access the page.
Also, I would personally suggest you to raise a support ticket with Microsoft and I believe they might have better understanding on this issue to help you on this matter.
Here is a step-by-step guide with methods to resolve ‘Hyperlinks not working in Excel’ issue. Read on to learn more. You must have come across the proverbial advice — “Do not put all your eggs in one basket”. Well, this advice doesn’t just apply to financial savings, but is also relevant to data, for which it translates like this — don’t store all your data in a single large database but instead maintain smaller databases that are easier to manage and don’t get corrupt. This guiding principle has gained more relevance to the growing rate of data generation and reliance on software tools like Microsoft Excel to process the data.
However, users generally ignore this guiding principle and tend to stack the huge amount of information in a single Excel Workbook. Such data heavy Excel workbooks have significant chances of corruption, with hyperlinks among the first elements that get affected. As a result, Excel hyperlinks do not work anymore, which affects the overall information sanity and user experience. What exactly happens?
Suppose you’re managing the Sales records in an Excel workbook that has a variety of data associated with the final raw data. For instance, data related to regional monthly sales, monthly performance of individual team members and their incentives. The problem arises when you implement hyperlinks to the classified sheets to assess employee performance and the hyperlinks don’t open. Many a time, this issue may crop up due to Workbook corruption, either due to storing a vast amount of data or abrupt Workbook shutdown. So, how to resolve the ‘hyperlinks not working in Excel’ problem? This blog post presents a few common causes of this problem along with the methods to fix them. Changes in the hyperlinked worksheet file name Have you renamed the worksheets that are linked through the hyperlinks?
If you have renamed the target worksheets, the hyperlinks will not work, as expected. Solution. Recreate the hyperlinks again to target the renamed worksheet. Use correct address as available in the current worksheet. The whole process may be tedious but better than the situation where you are unable to open the Excel Hyperlinks. Abrupt shutdown and worksheet file closure The hyperlinks and other data in a worksheet may present discrepancy in case of a sudden system shutdown, without proper saving and closure of the file. There is an inbuilt option in Excel to update Hyperlinks every time the workbook is saved.
If these links are updated every time the workbook is saved, chances of the hyperlinks not working is increased.
Note: To fix multiple links, hold down, and then click each link. Click Change Source. Browse to the location of the file containing the linked data. Select the new source file, and then click Change Source.
Click Close. Remove a broken link When you break a link, all formulas that refer to the source file are converted to their current value. For example, if the formula =SUM (Budget.xlsAnnual!C10:C25) results in 45, the formula would be converted to 45 after the link is broken. Open the workbook that contains the broken link.
On the Data tab, click Edit Links. The Edit Links command is unavailable if your workbook doesn't contain links. In the Source file box, select the broken link that you want to delete.
Note: To fix multiple links, hold down, and then click each link. Click Change Source.
Do one of the following: To Do this Fix a broken link to a sheet in another workbook In the Open dialog box, locate the workbook, and then click Change. Fix a broken link to a workbook or other Office document Type the new name or location for the document in the Change links to text box, and then click OK. Turn off automatic updates for linked data. Open the workbook that contains the broken link.
On the Edit menu, click Links. The Links command is unavailable if your workbook does not contain links. In the Source file box, click the broken link that you want to fix. Note: To fix multiple links, hold down, and then click each link.
Click Manual. Remove a broken link When you break a link, all formulas that reference the source file are converted to their current value.
For example, if the formula =SUM (Budget.xlsAnnual!C10:C25) results in 45, the formula would be converted to 45 after the link is broken. Open the workbook that contains the broken link. On the Edit menu, click Links.
The Links command is unavailable if your workbook does not contain links. In the Source file box, click the broken link that you want to remove.