Error 400 Cookie Too Large Chrome

[stronggater]

Normally use Chrome to access the site, but lately been getting an Error 400. Looking up the error online and the suggested fix is to delete the cookies from Chrome, which I've done multiple times, even deleting the whole site data folder, yet it still happens. Just checked a second ago and it let me on for like 2 pages before throwing the error again, so now I'm back using Firefox, which isnt really much of an issue, but I suppose if someone else has this issue, It'd be nice to have a solution for it other than "just use another browser".

[dharvinia]

It is probably an issue with a "super cookie"  These cookies do not reside on temp files but actually hide in reserved memory.

they require a special file to remove them.  HOWEVER, be warned that many suppliers of the file to remove the cookies also add software to spy on your activities.

[Reginald_001]

16 hours ago, dharvinia said:

It is probably an issue with a "super cookie"  These cookies do not reside on temp files but actually hide in reserved memory.

they require a special file to remove them.  HOWEVER, be warned that many suppliers of the file to remove the cookies also add software to spy on your activities.

\

 

^THIS WAS MEANT IN JEST.

 

Here follows a more elaborate response on Super cookies, which likely have nothing to do with the TS's issues:

Cookies vs. Super cookies

The name is rather misleading because supercookies are not actually cookies:

• Supercookies don't use local storage as regular cookies do. Instead, they are injected at the network level as Unique Identifier Headers (UIDH).
• Supercookies are inserted by your Internet Service Provider (ISP) rather than the website itself.
• You may not be aware of their existence as the ISP might use them in secret.
• UIDH personal data can be revealed to any website and potentially sold to third parties. Verizon has previously told their partners that they use this type of tracking and have received a $1.35 million fine from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
• Supercookies allow third parties to track you too. They can independently identify tracking headers themselves and use the data to serve you targeted ads across the web.
• Supercookies can restore the data of your deleted cookies and link the data with new ones. They can access your login credentials, image and file caches, and plug-in data.
• Ad blockers can’t block them, and you can't clear them by deleting your browser history and cache data.
• You can’t simply delete supercookies. You only opt-out if your ISP allows you to.

[nugerumon]

I use the "EditThisCookie" addon for my chromium derivate, and there I can see that for each download, a "ips4_downloads_delay_randomnumbershere"-cookie is saved. At some point these cookies are too many, which results in the Error 400. With EditThisCookie I can export all cookies, delete the downloads_delay-cookies, reimport the others and then it works again. Just removing all cookies should work, too, but that also removes the session cookie so you have to log in again.

 

I sent a message to the board admins a while ago but haven't gotten a reaction, don't know if anyone is looking into the issue.

 

 

On 8/27/2019 at 8:41 AM, Reginald_001 said:

*scary stuff about supercookies, copypasta from a VPN vendor that wants to sell you VPN, go figure*

No.

Even an ISP can't inject anything into encrypted communication. If you are browsing via https (like on LL), you're safe. With the only exception that a "man in the middle" pretends to be the target website, which is difficult because then the certificate name doesn't match and you see a warning. After (admittedly short) research, it seems verizon is the only company using a UIDH, and only for their own services and advertising partners (and maybe unencrypted traffic, but that actually isn't useful - the ISP already knows where you're going if it's unencrypted, and the target website ignores the UIDH, so why even include it?).

 

A more common use for the term "supercookie" is any data locally saved on your PC that's not an actual cookie, i.e. isn't deleted by most methods used to delete cookies (and isn't transferred every time you request a website). In ye olden days that were flash cookies (data stored by the flash player), and with html5 (which is relatively new) comes a new type of local storage, that, of course, isn't deleted when you delete only cookies. There are other methods to delete it, though.

 

So the issue isn't with a supercookie. And supercookies aren't that scary. Tracking pixels, facebook buttons, ads served from third party servers (which can even contain viruses, so better use an ad blocker), etc, are way more worrying. Just keep in mind that clearing cookies alone might not be enough for a website to not recognize you.

[Reginald_001]

12 minutes ago, nugerumon said:

I use the "EditThisCookie" addon for my chromium derivate, and there I can see that for each download, a "ips4_downloads_delay_randomnumbershere"-cookie is saved. At some point these cookies are too many, which results in the Error 400. With EditThisCookie I can export all cookies, delete the downloads_delay-cookies, reimport the others and then it works again. Just removing all cookies should work, too, but that also removes the session cookie so you have to log in again.

 

I sent a message to the board admins a while ago but haven't gotten a reaction, don't know if anyone is looking into the issue.

 

 

No.

Even an ISP can't inject anything into encrypted communication. If you are browsing via https (like on LL), you're safe. With the only exception that a "man in the middle" pretends to be the target website, which is difficult because then the certificate name doesn't match and you see a warning. After (admittedly short) research, it seems verizon is the only company using a UIDH, and only for their own services and advertising partners (and maybe unencrypted traffic, but that actually isn't useful - the ISP already knows where you're going if it's unencrypted, and the target website ignores the UIDH, so why even include it?).

 

A more common use for the term "supercookie" is any data locally saved on your PC that's not an actual cookie, i.e. isn't deleted by most methods used to delete cookies (and isn't transferred every time you request a website). In ye olden days that were flash cookies (data stored by the flash player), and with html5 (which is relatively new) comes a new type of local storage, that, of course, isn't deleted when you delete only cookies. There are other methods to delete it, though.

 

So the issue isn't with a supercookie. And supercookies aren't that scary. Tracking pixels, facebook buttons, ads served from third party servers (which can even contain viruses, so better use an ad blocker), etc, are way more worrying. Just keep in mind that clearing cookies alone might not be enough for a website to not recognize you.

If you read my post you'd have seen this line:

 

"Here follows a more elaborate response on Super cookies, which likely have nothing to do with the TS's issues."

 

Furthermore, never do I specify cookies are 'scary' or do I even hint for people to use a VPN. I merely googled what a supercookie was and posted this.

Stop putting words and opinions into my mouth, making assumptions and then replying to your assumptions about my opnion.

 

We agree on most of what you said, so there's no need to be so combative.

[nugerumon]

15 minutes ago, Reginald_001 said:

If you read my post you'd have seen this line:

 

Here follows a more elaborate response on Super cookies, which likely have nothing to do with the TS's issues.

Furthermore, never do I specify cookies are 'scary' or do I even hint for people to use a VPN.

 

Stop putting words and opinions into my mouth.

Well, YOU stop putting words in MY mouth.

You included some "facts" about supercookies, that, while not completely wrong, is also missing much of what supercookies are. I think the list sounds scary (and so should you), and considering it's been compiled by a company that wants to sell you VPN to "protect" you from such supercookies, it's very much intended to sound scary. And that list is what i refer to when I quote "scary stuff about supercookies".

How you jump from "supercookies are scary" to "cookies are scary" is beyond me.

I did not quote, say, nor imply, anything about whether you confirm or deny that the TS's issues might be related to supercookies.

[Reginald_001]

22 minutes ago, nugerumon said:

How you jump from "supercookies are scary" to "cookies are scary" is beyond me.

Again, I never said supercookies are scary, so I never jumped from there to anywhere.

 

Having said that, yesterday I drank for the first time in 25 years. It was a most expensive wine and my hangover is real so I could be reading things crooked.

[nugerumon]

39 minutes ago, Reginald_001 said:

Again, I never said supercookies are scary, so I never jumped from there to anywhere.

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to reply again, lest we get into a situation where everyone wants to have the last word.

But just let me tell you this: If you say/write something, without making clear it's a quotation, people will assume that it's your opinion.

I'd have tried to relativize it anyway (maybe worded differently), though. ?

 

Good luck getting over your hangover. ?

[effrenatus]

On 8/30/2019 at 11:50 AM, nugerumon said:

I use the "EditThisCookie" addon for my chromium derivate, and there I can see that for each download, a "ips4_downloads_delay_randomnumbershere"-cookie is saved. At some point these cookies are too many, which results in the Error 400. With EditThisCookie I can export all cookies, delete the downloads_delay-cookies, reimport the others and then it works again. Just removing all cookies should work, too, but that also removes the session cookie so you have to log in again.

 

I sent a message to the board admins a while ago but haven't gotten a reaction, don't know if anyone is looking into the issue.

Thank you for pointing to that Crome extension. Solved my problem after a day of headache!