July Reminders: Crashes You’re Blamed For That Aren’t Your Fault

Written by Evan Schuman
July 8th, 2009

With just four short months remaining before the holiday shopping season starts, it’s not like E-Commerce directors need reminding that Web sites have minds of their own and they’ll crash no matter what they do. Those directors also do not need reminding that they work for CFOs and CEOs who often seem to have no minds of their own and will blame them for anything that goes wrong with the site, despite facts and laws of nature.

But July has chosen to remind us of these sad realities anyway. The malicious Denial of Service attacks are still out there—as the U.S. and South Korean governments learned this week–and the most meticulous plans of backup procedures can still knock out a site (or a payment processor) for six hours, as discovered on July 2 when it was done in by a fire.

But the most frightening reminder happened at the very end of June, when singer Michael Jackson died, causing a flood of traffic of people looking for confirmation and details. The traffic spikes were so sudden and extreme that Google literally thought it was being hit by a DOS attack and shut down servers, before figuring out what had happened.

The parallel with E-Commerce is traffic preparedness. Major news Web sites certainly have a reasonable expectation that major world events will happen and that viewers will quickly try and turn to them for news. And in late November, the largest retailers need to be prepared for a tidal wave of traffic.

As retailers discovered during last year’s Black Friday, even if consumers plan on spending less online, they’ll still visit to try and find bargains. That means that lower revenues may just be married to higher traffic (just the kind of weddding your CFO would truly cry at).

When Keynote Systems started trying to analyze the Michael Jackson traffic and its impact on major news sites, it found the expected steep slowdown. But it also found an unexpected culprit: third-party content. That’s the same kind of content that retailers are relying on much more, as they try and cut costs while adding features for the holidays. Uh-oh.

Keynote’s Shawn White said the “main culprit of these performance and availability issues was third party content and providers’ ability to handle the flash crowd. This is an important distinction because, in some cases, depending upon how a site is constructed or how the Web browser is used, a page may display perfectly fine with a blank area where a third party image should have been shown. In other cases, the entire Web page will wait until that last image is downloaded from the third party advertisement service, frustrating the reader.”

Added White: “Our measurement data shows that for sites reported as having performance slowdowns yesterday, internal content delivered quite fast, however content that came from other sources contributed most to the site slowdowns.”

This is about when most E-Commerce directors are starting to make final calls to site partners, reminding them that they need to be able to handle the traffic. Michael Jackson has just given them one more reason to take those calls seriously.


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.