1-800-Flowers Site Reported Down For 65 Hours. The Reality, Though, Was Quite Different

Written by Evan Schuman
October 15th, 2009

Having long grown comfortable with using uptime monitoring services to check their own site’s ongoing performance, many retailers are toying with using such services to watch for problems with direct rivals. And they have customized E-mail blasts ready to launch at the first sign of trouble.

But an incident this week involving 1-800-Flowers—which the retail chain may have been utterly unaware of—illustrates one of the dangers of using Web monitoring services to track sites other than your own.

One site monitoring company this week reported that the E-Commerce site was down for a whopping 65 hours and 26 minutes. The flower company didn’t respond to our inquiries, but a fairly perplexed representative of the monitoring firm did.

“To be honest, this is one of those rare cases where I’m not entirely sure if this is legitimate downtime, that is, downtime that regular human Web site visitors would notice,” he said.

The representative said his system’s request was redirected in a loop in the vendor site and was “bounced between two servers indefinitely” until the monitoring software gave up. “What could be happening is that they, for some reason, try to set a cookie on our end and that the server it redirects to depends on that cookie (our system doesn’t allow cookies) and, therefore, when it can’t find a cookie, sends back the request and so on. On the other hand, if that’s the case, I don’t know why it isn’t broken all the time.”

Peter Alguacil, a Web analyst for site monitoring company Pingdom, said site monitors are primarily designed for use by site owners who know their sites inside and out.

“When you monitor your own site, you know all the idiosyncrasies from the backend,” Alguacil said. “If you for some reason are monitoring others’ sites, then you need to be aware that they may have some idiosyncrasies that kick in at some point.”

Alguacil said site monitoring companies rely on software that emulates Web browsers, a practice that usually works fine but can, on rare occasions, report errors real browsers would forgive.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.