Using Win11 and Edge browser. I want to see this
website. I used it years ago, probably using Ubuntu
and Firefox. The site had a page I want to see again.
The site is:
Chip_CD Media Resource Center
http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3

My system gives this warning:
Your connection isn't private
NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.

I'm careful to keep my PC clean these days.
Please tell me what you think.
Thank you
Bill S.

bilsch01 wrote on 4/22/24 1:22 PM:
> Using Win11 and Edge browser. I want to see this
> website. I used it years ago, probably using Ubuntu
> and Firefox. The site had a page I want to see again.
> The site is:
> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
> My system gives this warning:
> Your connection isn't private
> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> I'm careful to keep my PC clean these days.
> Please tell me what you think.
> Thank you
> Bill S.
>

Attempt to access the site without the filename.

Submit the full url(the one you posted) and the no filename url for results.

https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/home/upload
https://vms.drweb.com/
https://www.ipqualityscore.com/
https://nordvpn.com/link-checker/

Fyi....chipchapin is not an active site.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

bilsch01 wrote:
> Using Win11 and Edge browser. I want to see this
> website. I used it years ago, probably using Ubuntu
> and Firefox. The site had a page I want to see again.
> The site is:
> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
> My system gives this warning:
> Your connection isn't private
> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> I'm careful to keep my PC clean these days.
> Please tell me what you think.
> Thank you
> Bill S.
>

Every browser I've launched warns against this website.
An example;
"Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to
chipchapin.com. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal
information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details."

Ed

On 2024-04-22 22:22, bilsch01 wrote:
> Using Win11 and Edge browser. I want to see this
> website. I used it years ago, probably using Ubuntu
> and Firefox. The site had a page I want to see again.
> The site is:
> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
> My system gives this warning:
> Your connection isn't private
> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> I'm careful to keep my PC clean these days.
> Please tell me what you think.

The site is on http, and gets automatically redirected to the https
version, and FF in Linux gives a warning:

«Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to
chipchapin.com. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal
information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.»

Now, this is not as bad as it seems.

If the site were a bank, as the connection is not encrypted, someone
could see what you type or what you read. But it is not a bank. Just be
careful not to type anything, and you are safe.

So I click "advanced", then select "accept the risk and continue".

But then there is another error: «The page isn’t redirecting properly»

It seems a dead end. The page is not properly maintained, has probably
been incorrectly migrated from http to htpps, and maybe other errors.

So instead go to the wayback machine and try there:

https://wayback-api.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/http://chipchapin.com

As I don't know what to expect or seek for, now it is for you to find
there your wanted information.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

bilsch01 <usenet@writer.com> wrote:

> The site is:
> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3 <---.
> |__ Yep, HTTP is not
> My system gives this warning: | private. HTTPS is.
> Your connection isn't private <---'
> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.

The site is using the wrong certificate. I got one where the domain
specified for the cert was flynngraphics.ca, but that is NOT where you
are visiting which is chipchapin.com. Site domain and cert are not
matched.

Since the site has a certificate, you should be using HTTPS to connect
there, like:

https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3

However, if the site fucked up by trying to [re]use a cert that does not
match the visited domain, all you can do is inform the site admin that
they fucked up their cert. They may have intended to get a multi-domain
cert that covers a multitude of domains, but that's not what they used.

You can test the validity of a site's cert by testing the domain (not
the path, just the domain - just specify chipchapin.com) at:

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/

You'll see that site has such major problems with a cert that ssllabs
doesn't even bother to continue exercising the rest of its tests.

You never mentioned your version of Firefox. I currently have 120.1.
When I try to visit the HTTPS version of their site (since apparently
they do have a cert despite it is for the wrong domain), Firefox says:

Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not
trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for
chipchapin.com. The certificate is only valid for
mail.flynngraphics.ca.

Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN

Click on the error code hyperlink for more info. Click on View
Certificate to see the cert is NOT for the chipchapin.com domain.

The site thought it could deploy any farking cert it got on any domain
they have. Wrong. Cert and domain must match. That's how you know the
site you intended to visit is the one where you landed.

While you used http:// to visit the site, many sites will redirect HTTP
connects to HTTPS web pages to secure the connection. Not only do
certificates provide for encrypting the connection, they are also used
to verify identity. That's why you see Firefox taking your http:// URL
whereupon the site redirects you to their https:// URL, but their cert
is invalid.

Firefox is more informative than Edge regarding cert mismatches, or even
in cert definitions. However, even Edge gives some information. When
you attempt to visit http://chipchapin.com, the site redirects you to
their secured https://chipchapin.com web page, but their cert is
invalid, and why Edge, at least, tells you (click on Advanced):

This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com; its security
certificate is from mail.flynngraphics.ca. This may be caused by a
misconfiguration or an attacker intercepting your connection.

While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down. Their
web server cannot deliver you any of its web docs, like the main page.
chipchapin.com is a web-host site. They don't operate their own web and
nameservers. They paid someone to host their web site. Guess they
didn't keep up with the payments.

chipchapin.com = 208.109.27.19

IPwhois shows that domain is registered at GoDaddy. They also provide
web hosting services. When you elect to have a web-hosted site at
GoDaddy, they'll include or discount their certificate.

https://www.whois.com/whois/208.109.27.19

208.109.27.19 is in GoDaddy's IP pool. The web site is both registered
at GoDaddy, and hosted at GoDaddy. If you do a traceroute:

tracert 208.109.27.19

You'll see the trace shows hitting gdinf.net (a GoDaddy site) and
secureserver.net (WildWest Domains is owned by GoDaddy).

You didn't say how long ago was when you previously visited that site.
You can find archived copies at:

https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/chipchapin.com

The default is to select the current year, but you can select a prior
year, and dates shown when the site was polled, to see what the site
used to look like. There were no polls in 2024. There were some in
2023. There were no hits in 2020, so I picked some poll dates in 2019,
like:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190112212405/http://www.chipchapin.com/

I jumped forward into 2021 to see the site was under construction:

https://web.archive.org/web/20211207065055/https://chipchapin.com/

Was still under construction until Oct 2021. Then, in Feb 2023, the
site could no longer be found (301 error, meaning "moved permanently").
The web server might be a remnant of the web-hosting service to the
site, but the site no longer exists. Guess Chip Chapin decided to stop
paying GoDaddy to continue webhosting his site, or he got disinterested,
or he died.

The the archived copies of his site, at the bottom are the lines:

Copyright 2000 - 2008
Updated Saturday May 03, 2008 22:04:39 PDT

How long ago was it when you last visited there?

On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:55:38 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>bilsch01 <usenet@writer.com> wrote:
>
>> The site is:
>> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
>> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3 <---.
>> |__ Yep, HTTP is not
>> My system gives this warning: | private. HTTPS is.
>> Your connection isn't private <---'
>> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
>> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
>> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
>The site is using the wrong certificate. I got one where the domain
>specified for the cert was flynngraphics.ca, but that is NOT where you
>are visiting which is chipchapin.com. Site domain and cert are not
>matched.
>
>Since the site has a certificate, you should be using HTTPS to connect
>there, like:
>
>https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
>However, if the site fucked up by trying to [re]use a cert that does not
>match the visited domain, all you can do is inform the site admin that
>they fucked up their cert. They may have intended to get a multi-domain
>cert that covers a multitude of domains, but that's not what they used.
>
>You can test the validity of a site's cert by testing the domain (not
>the path, just the domain - just specify chipchapin.com) at:
>
>https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/
>
>You'll see that site has such major problems with a cert that ssllabs
>doesn't even bother to continue exercising the rest of its tests.
>
>You never mentioned your version of Firefox. I currently have 120.1.
>When I try to visit the HTTPS version of their site (since apparently
>they do have a cert despite it is for the wrong domain), Firefox says:
>
> Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not
> trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for
> chipchapin.com. The certificate is only valid for
> mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN
>
>Click on the error code hyperlink for more info. Click on View
>Certificate to see the cert is NOT for the chipchapin.com domain.
>
>The site thought it could deploy any farking cert it got on any domain
>they have. Wrong. Cert and domain must match. That's how you know the
>site you intended to visit is the one where you landed.
>
>While you used http:// to visit the site, many sites will redirect HTTP
>connects to HTTPS web pages to secure the connection. Not only do
>certificates provide for encrypting the connection, they are also used
>to verify identity. That's why you see Firefox taking your http:// URL
>whereupon the site redirects you to their https:// URL, but their cert
>is invalid.
>
>Firefox is more informative than Edge regarding cert mismatches, or even
>in cert definitions. However, even Edge gives some information. When
>you attempt to visit http://chipchapin.com, the site redirects you to
>their secured https://chipchapin.com web page, but their cert is
>invalid, and why Edge, at least, tells you (click on Advanced):
>
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com; its security
> certificate is from mail.flynngraphics.ca. This may be caused by a
> misconfiguration or an attacker intercepting your connection.
>
>While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down.

Technically, the site is still up, in a worthless way. It can be resolved via
DNS and access attempts via http get properly redirected to https, but if you go
past the incorrect cert you see that the https site gets redirected to itself.
That's usually a simple misconfiguration, but there's no way to know someone's
motivations for doing that.

<snip>

Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>> While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down.
>
> Technically, the site is still up, in a worthless way. It can be resolved via
> DNS and access attempts via http get properly redirected to https, but if you go
> past the incorrect cert you see that the https site gets redirected to itself.
> That's usually a simple misconfiguration, but there's no way to know someone's
> motivations for doing that.

That's why I figured the GoDaddy webhosted site still has GoDaddy's
services, but the webhosted site doesn't work, or the "work in progress"
never got completed or screwed up, or it got parked (no long usable).

I tried to find if Chip Chapin was still alive, but didn't find anything
solid to go on. The archived web site has an e-mail contact, but I
didn't bother trying to send a message to there. There are too many
folks that died that used the "Chip" nickname. His archived web site
mentions "San Jose" as his hometown, but still no search hits, or social
sites that want me to login (which means I'd have to create an account).
I don't do social sites. I did find:

https://www.blogger.com/profile/16519687674958906157

which mentions both San Jose, and Mustangs71 that he mentioned in his
archived web site about his yearbooks, reunions, classmate info, etc
(http://mustangs71.blogspot.com/). The Mustangs71 link mentions "Class
of 1971". Figuring that might he his high school graduation year, and
adding 18 years to be a graduate, he would now be around 71 years old.

Looks like he inhabited the blog site only during 2011. He might've
died. So, payments to GoDaddy for his webhosted site went missing,
GoDaddy doesn't allow access, and just has a placeholder for his site.

What happens if you don't pay GoDaddy?
We'll try to auto-renew again - but if that doesn't work, your domain
gets parked: your site and email stop working. But you can still
manually renew for the standard renewal price.

His chipchapin.com domain was registered in 2000, and expires in 2024.
It is registered at DomainsByProxy (another GoDaddy property).

Are we taking bets? If so, my bet is Chapin is dead. No proof, just a
guess.

On 4/22/2024 2:55 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> bilsch01 <usenet@writer.com> wrote:
>
>> The site is:
>> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
>> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3 <---.
>> |__ Yep, HTTP is not
>> My system gives this warning: | private. HTTPS is.
>> Your connection isn't private <---'
>> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
>> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
>> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> The site is using the wrong certificate. I got one where the domain
> specified for the cert was flynngraphics.ca, but that is NOT where you
> are visiting which is chipchapin.com. Site domain and cert are not
> matched.
>
> Since the site has a certificate, you should be using HTTPS to connect
> there, like:
>
> https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
> However, if the site fucked up by trying to [re]use a cert that does not
> match the visited domain, all you can do is inform the site admin that
> they fucked up their cert. They may have intended to get a multi-domain
> cert that covers a multitude of domains, but that's not what they used.
>
> You can test the validity of a site's cert by testing the domain (not
> the path, just the domain - just specify chipchapin.com) at:
>
> https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/
>
> You'll see that site has such major problems with a cert that ssllabs
> doesn't even bother to continue exercising the rest of its tests.
>
> You never mentioned your version of Firefox. I currently have 120.1.
> When I try to visit the HTTPS version of their site (since apparently
> they do have a cert despite it is for the wrong domain), Firefox says:
>
> Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not
> trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for
> chipchapin.com. The certificate is only valid for
> mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN
>
> Click on the error code hyperlink for more info. Click on View
> Certificate to see the cert is NOT for the chipchapin.com domain.
>
> The site thought it could deploy any farking cert it got on any domain
> they have. Wrong. Cert and domain must match. That's how you know the
> site you intended to visit is the one where you landed.
>
> While you used http:// to visit the site, many sites will redirect HTTP
> connects to HTTPS web pages to secure the connection. Not only do
> certificates provide for encrypting the connection, they are also used
> to verify identity. That's why you see Firefox taking your http:// URL
> whereupon the site redirects you to their https:// URL, but their cert
> is invalid.
>
> Firefox is more informative than Edge regarding cert mismatches, or even
> in cert definitions. However, even Edge gives some information. When
> you attempt to visit http://chipchapin.com, the site redirects you to
> their secured https://chipchapin.com web page, but their cert is
> invalid, and why Edge, at least, tells you (click on Advanced):
>
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com; its security
> certificate is from mail.flynngraphics.ca. This may be caused by a
> misconfiguration or an attacker intercepting your connection.
>
> While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down. Their
> web server cannot deliver you any of its web docs, like the main page.
> chipchapin.com is a web-host site. They don't operate their own web and
> nameservers. They paid someone to host their web site. Guess they
> didn't keep up with the payments.
>
> chipchapin.com = 208.109.27.19
>
> IPwhois shows that domain is registered at GoDaddy. They also provide
> web hosting services. When you elect to have a web-hosted site at
> GoDaddy, they'll include or discount their certificate.
>
> https://www.whois.com/whois/208.109.27.19
>
> 208.109.27.19 is in GoDaddy's IP pool. The web site is both registered
> at GoDaddy, and hosted at GoDaddy. If you do a traceroute:
>
> tracert 208.109.27.19
>
> You'll see the trace shows hitting gdinf.net (a GoDaddy site) and
> secureserver.net (WildWest Domains is owned by GoDaddy).
>
> You didn't say how long ago was when you previously visited that site.
> You can find archived copies at:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/chipchapin.com
>
> The default is to select the current year, but you can select a prior
> year, and dates shown when the site was polled, to see what the site
> used to look like. There were no polls in 2024. There were some in
> 2023. There were no hits in 2020, so I picked some poll dates in 2019,
> like:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190112212405/http://www.chipchapin.com/
>
> I jumped forward into 2021 to see the site was under construction:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20211207065055/https://chipchapin.com/
>
> Was still under construction until Oct 2021. Then, in Feb 2023, the
> site could no longer be found (301 error, meaning "moved permanently").
> The web server might be a remnant of the web-hosting service to the
> site, but the site no longer exists. Guess Chip Chapin decided to stop
> paying GoDaddy to continue webhosting his site, or he got disinterested,
> or he died.
>
> The the archived copies of his site, at the bottom are the lines:
>
> Copyright 2000 - 2008
> Updated Saturday May 03, 2008 22:04:39 PDT
>
> How long ago was it when you last visited there?
the link I copied says April 30, 2008

On 4/22/2024 2:55 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> bilsch01 <usenet@writer.com> wrote:
>
>> The site is:
>> Chip_CD Media Resource Center
>> http://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3 <---.
>> |__ Yep, HTTP is not
>> My system gives this warning: | private. HTTPS is.
>> Your connection isn't private <---'
>> NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID
>> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com;
>> its certificate says mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> The site is using the wrong certificate. I got one where the domain
> specified for the cert was flynngraphics.ca, but that is NOT where you
> are visiting which is chipchapin.com. Site domain and cert are not
> matched.
>
> Since the site has a certificate, you should be using HTTPS to connect
> there, like:
>
> https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://chipchapin.com/CDMedia/cdda4.php3
>
> However, if the site fucked up by trying to [re]use a cert that does not
> match the visited domain, all you can do is inform the site admin that
> they fucked up their cert. They may have intended to get a multi-domain
> cert that covers a multitude of domains, but that's not what they used.
>
> You can test the validity of a site's cert by testing the domain (not
> the path, just the domain - just specify chipchapin.com) at:
>
> https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/
>
> You'll see that site has such major problems with a cert that ssllabs
> doesn't even bother to continue exercising the rest of its tests.
>
> You never mentioned your version of Firefox. I currently have 120.1.
> When I try to visit the HTTPS version of their site (since apparently
> they do have a cert despite it is for the wrong domain), Firefox says:
>
> Websites prove their identity via certificates. Firefox does not
> trust this site because it uses a certificate that is not valid for
> chipchapin.com. The certificate is only valid for
> mail.flynngraphics.ca.
>
> Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN
>
> Click on the error code hyperlink for more info. Click on View
> Certificate to see the cert is NOT for the chipchapin.com domain.
>
> The site thought it could deploy any farking cert it got on any domain
> they have. Wrong. Cert and domain must match. That's how you know the
> site you intended to visit is the one where you landed.
>
> While you used http:// to visit the site, many sites will redirect HTTP
> connects to HTTPS web pages to secure the connection. Not only do
> certificates provide for encrypting the connection, they are also used
> to verify identity. That's why you see Firefox taking your http:// URL
> whereupon the site redirects you to their https:// URL, but their cert
> is invalid.
>
> Firefox is more informative than Edge regarding cert mismatches, or even
> in cert definitions. However, even Edge gives some information. When
> you attempt to visit http://chipchapin.com, the site redirects you to
> their secured https://chipchapin.com web page, but their cert is
> invalid, and why Edge, at least, tells you (click on Advanced):
>
> This server couldn't prove that it's chipchapin.com; its security
> certificate is from mail.flynngraphics.ca. This may be caused by a
> misconfiguration or an attacker intercepting your connection.
>
> While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down. Their
> web server cannot deliver you any of its web docs, like the main page.
> chipchapin.com is a web-host site. They don't operate their own web and
> nameservers. They paid someone to host their web site. Guess they
> didn't keep up with the payments.
>
> chipchapin.com = 208.109.27.19
>
> IPwhois shows that domain is registered at GoDaddy. They also provide
> web hosting services. When you elect to have a web-hosted site at
> GoDaddy, they'll include or discount their certificate.
>
> https://www.whois.com/whois/208.109.27.19
>
> 208.109.27.19 is in GoDaddy's IP pool. The web site is both registered
> at GoDaddy, and hosted at GoDaddy. If you do a traceroute:
>
> tracert 208.109.27.19
>
> You'll see the trace shows hitting gdinf.net (a GoDaddy site) and
> secureserver.net (WildWest Domains is owned by GoDaddy).
>
> You didn't say how long ago was when you previously visited that site.
> You can find archived copies at:
This is amazing. I went to this WayBack site and choose a year
and it shows me a calendar with highlighted days the site was
archived. I click on one of those and it displays a link that
takes me to the archived site.
Thank you.
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/chipchapin.com
>
> The default is to select the current year, but you can select a prior
> year, and dates shown when the site was polled, to see what the site
> used to look like. There were no polls in 2024. There were some in
> 2023. There were no hits in 2020, so I picked some poll dates in 2019,
> like:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190112212405/http://www.chipchapin.com/
>
> I jumped forward into 2021 to see the site was under construction:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20211207065055/https://chipchapin.com/
>
> Was still under construction until Oct 2021. Then, in Feb 2023, the
> site could no longer be found (301 error, meaning "moved permanently").
> The web server might be a remnant of the web-hosting service to the
> site, but the site no longer exists. Guess Chip Chapin decided to stop
> paying GoDaddy to continue webhosting his site, or he got disinterested,
> or he died.
>
> The the archived copies of his site, at the bottom are the lines:
>
> Copyright 2000 - 2008
> Updated Saturday May 03, 2008 22:04:39 PDT
>
> How long ago was it when you last visited there?

On 4/23/2024 3:59 AM, bilsch01 wrote:
> This is amazing. I went to this WayBack site and choose a year
> and it shows me a calendar with highlighted days the site was
> archived. I click on one of those and it displays a link that
> takes me to the archived site.
> Thank you.

If you're in a situation where the "main page" won't put up the
correct graphics elements, you can try this.

1) Go to https://archive.org/advancedsearch.php

2) Upper right corner.
Left-click the search icon.
Select "radio button" entitled Search Archived Web Sites

3) Now, paste the desired URL (web site address) into the
search box in the upper right.

Probably half the web content that was on the Microsoft web site,
is archived in there, and that's what we use for questions on
older OSes.

When a returned result is a rather large file, like say it was
a 10GB file, the archive.org web server will serve the file at
345KB/sec. You can use a byte-range transfer agent such as
Aria2C, to open multiple connections to the server, to attempt
to get a better transfer rate.

I don't generally encourage people to beat the piss out of that
site for 10GB files, but sometimes it's the only source of a file.

FTP sites, such as the old ftp.microsoft.com site , are not archived.
It's mainly an archive of http/https materials. If a web site uses a
"unique download link response" such as making dynamic content of
some sort, again, sometimes you will find that the archive.org scraper
cannot properly record the site.

Paul

On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:07:19 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>
>>> While their frontend looks to still work, their web site is down.
>>
>> Technically, the site is still up, in a worthless way. It can be resolved via
>> DNS and access attempts via http get properly redirected to https, but if you go
>> past the incorrect cert you see that the https site gets redirected to itself.
>> That's usually a simple misconfiguration, but there's no way to know someone's
>> motivations for doing that.
>
>That's why I figured the GoDaddy webhosted site still has GoDaddy's
>services, but the webhosted site doesn't work, or the "work in progress"
>never got completed or screwed up, or it got parked (no long usable).
>
>I tried to find if Chip Chapin was still alive, but didn't find anything
>solid to go on. The archived web site has an e-mail contact, but I
>didn't bother trying to send a message to there. There are too many
>folks that died that used the "Chip" nickname. His archived web site
>mentions "San Jose" as his hometown, but still no search hits, or social
>sites that want me to login (which means I'd have to create an account).
>I don't do social sites. I did find:
>
>https://www.blogger.com/profile/16519687674958906157
>
>which mentions both San Jose, and Mustangs71 that he mentioned in his
>archived web site about his yearbooks, reunions, classmate info, etc
>(http://mustangs71.blogspot.com/). The Mustangs71 link mentions "Class
>of 1971". Figuring that might he his high school graduation year, and
>adding 18 years to be a graduate, he would now be around 71 years old.
>
>Looks like he inhabited the blog site only during 2011. He might've
>died. So, payments to GoDaddy for his webhosted site went missing,
>GoDaddy doesn't allow access, and just has a placeholder for his site.
>
> What happens if you don't pay GoDaddy?
> We'll try to auto-renew again - but if that doesn't work, your domain
> gets parked: your site and email stop working. But you can still
> manually renew for the standard renewal price.
>
>His chipchapin.com domain was registered in 2000, and expires in 2024.
>It is registered at DomainsByProxy (another GoDaddy property).
>
>Are we taking bets? If so, my bet is Chapin is dead. No proof, just a
>guess.

I think you've gone above and beyond the bounds of a quick look-see. Kudos. :)