[PANTUGGeneral] Website archive question

12 views
Skip to first unread message

Paul B.Toms

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 12:35:59 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
Don't know if anybody can help, but seemed worth a shot. We have an
attorney here who needs to find out when a particular section of a
website first appeared online. I tried the 'wayback machine' with
limited success (they only have 2 captures within a month either way of
the date we're looking for, and none in the month in question). Does
anybody know how this can be done, and/or is there somebody we can hire
to do the searching for us? We have a press release bragging about a
new feature on a site, but need to confirm when the material actually
appeared on their website. It's not an issue of domain name or anything
simple like that, it's probably going to come down to finding a better,
more complete archive than wayback, if there is such a thing.
Anyway, if anybody thinks they might be able to help, please let me
know. Thanks!



<http://photos.imageevent.com/thetomsfamily/posting/RRKD-Logo.gif>
Cira Centre, 13th Floor
2929 Arch Street
Philadelphia, Pa 19104
Phone: 215.495.6500
Fax: 215.495.6600
Web: www.regerlaw.com <http://www.regerlaw.com/> Paul B. Toms
Manager, Information Systems
pt...@regerlaw.com
Direct: 215.495.6539


NEW IRS RULES RESTRICT WRITTEN FEDERAL TAX ADVICE FROM LAWYERS AND
ACCOUNTANTS. WE INCLUDE THIS STATEMENT IN ALL OUTBOUND EMAILS BECAUSE
EVEN INADVERTENT VIOLATIONS MAY BE PENALIZED. NOTHING IN THIS MESSAGE IS
INTENDED TO BE USED, OR MAY BE USED, TO AVOID ANY PENALTY UNDER FEDERAL
TAX LAWS. THIS MESSAGE WAS NOT WRITTEN TO SUPPORT THE PROMOTION OR
MARKETING OF ANY TRANSACTION. CONTACT THE SENDER IF YOU WISH TO ENGAGE
US TO PROVIDE FORMAL WRITTEN ADVICE AS TO TAX ISSUES.
THIS E-MAIL MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, COPYRIGHTED, OR OTHER
LEGALLY PROTECTED INFORMATION. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT
(EVEN IF THE E-MAIL ADDRESS ABOVE IS YOURS), YOU MAY NOT USE, COPY, OR
RETRANSMIT IT. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS BY MISTAKE PLEASE NOTIFY US BY
RETURN E-MAIL, THEN DELETE. THANK YOU.

_______________________________________________
PANTUGGeneral mailing list: PANTUG...@lists.pantug.org
To remove your address or change your delivery options see:
http://lists.pantug.org/mailman/listinfo/pantuggeneral
For the searchable archives see:
http://groups.google.com/group/pantug/

Jim DeCaro

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 12:53:18 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
Do you have access to any of the content files for the web site?

Paul B.Toms

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:23:28 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
No. It's not our website, it's the other side's. All we have access to
is anything we can get from what's there now, or anything that's
archived somewhere publicly available.



Paul B. Toms
Manager, Information Systems
pt...@regerlaw.com
Direct: 215.495.6539

Reger Rizzo & Darnall LLP


Cira Centre, 13th Floor
2929 Arch Street
Philadelphia, Pa 19104
Phone: 215.495.6500
Fax: 215.495.6600
Web: www.regerlaw.com

NEW IRS RULES RESTRICT WRITTEN FEDERAL TAX ADVICE FROM LAWYERS AND
ACCOUNTANTS. WE INCLUDE THIS STATEMENT IN ALL OUTBOUND EMAILS BECAUSE
EVEN INADVERTENT VIOLATIONS MAY BE PENALIZED. NOTHING IN THIS MESSAGE IS
INTENDED TO BE USED, OR MAY BE USED, TO AVOID ANY PENALTY UNDER FEDERAL
TAX LAWS. THIS MESSAGE WAS NOT WRITTEN TO SUPPORT THE PROMOTION OR
MARKETING OF ANY TRANSACTION. CONTACT THE SENDER IF YOU WISH TO ENGAGE
US TO PROVIDE FORMAL WRITTEN ADVICE AS TO TAX ISSUES.
THIS E-MAIL MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, COPYRIGHTED, OR OTHER
LEGALLY PROTECTED INFORMATION. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT
(EVEN IF THE E-MAIL ADDRESS ABOVE IS YOURS), YOU MAY NOT USE, COPY, OR
RETRANSMIT IT. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS BY MISTAKE PLEASE NOTIFY US BY
RETURN E-MAIL, THEN DELETE. THANK YOU.

Jake Gardner

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:13:44 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
Log files from the server should show when the pages/content first started to be requested/served.


 
Thanks,
 
Jake Gardner
Network Administrator
267-352-2020 Ext. 246
www.ttcdas.com


-----Original Message-----
From: pantuggene...@lists.pantug.org [mailto:pantuggene...@lists.pantug.org] On Behalf Of Paul B.Toms
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:36 PM
To: PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)

Teletronics Technology Corporation
This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the addressee or authorized by the addressee to receive this e-mail, you may not disclose, copy, distribute, or use this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or by telephone at 267-352-2020 and destroy this message and any copies.

Thank you.

Jim DeCaro

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:39:43 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
I am not well versed in html, but has someone attempted to review the code
on the web pages by viewing the source? I don't know if the source code has
any date stamps, but it would not hurt to look.

If you don't have access to server files, then it would take some detective
work. What I mean is, someone would have to determine exactly what the web
feature did, then try and determine what exactly it affects. At that point,
you could guesstimate who or what may have had a residual from visiting the
page early on, such as a cookie or history cache.

Good luck, and please let us know if you figure it out.

Paul B.Toms

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:49:36 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
It's a page, or set of pages. It's an informational type website
(sorry, I need to be vague, or I'd just tell you the site and the
section, but you know how lawyers are...). If it was a website about
video games (it isn't), then say they covered xbox and Playstation, and
about a year ago they added a section on the Wii. We need to know
exactly when they added the Wii section. It's not really a feature,
just a new area of the website with a different type of information. We
don't have any access to the server or anything, we have the same access
that any of you have (unless you work for them). Since it was a year
ago, we're not going to have anybody who happens to have it in a history
or cookie. I think we need something like wayback (Google doesn't seem
to have anything cached that far back, at least not that I can find),
and was hoping maybe one of you knew of another option. Thanks for the
ideas!

Jim DeCaro

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:54:25 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
Other than a subpoena or search warrant, I don't know of any way to get that
information short of illegally hacking the site, which I strongly recommend
against.

Jim

Paul B.Toms

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 1:58:44 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
That's kind of the conclusion I was coming to, but figured I should ask
people smarter than I am, before giving up. Thanks!

JP Vossen

unread,
Oct 14, 2010, 2:04:15 PM10/14/10
to PANTUG General Discussion (and technical Q&A)
On 10/14/2010 12:35 PM, Paul B.Toms wrote:
> Don't know if anybody can help, but seemed worth a shot. We have an
> attorney here who needs to find out when a particular section of a
> website first appeared online. I tried the 'wayback machine' with
> limited success (they only have 2 captures within a month either way of
> the date we're looking for, and none in the month in question). Does
> anybody know how this can be done, and/or is there somebody we can hire
> to do the searching for us? We have a press release bragging about a
> new feature on a site, but need to confirm when the material actually
> appeared on their website. It's not an issue of domain name or anything
> simple like that, it's probably going to come down to finding a better,
> more complete archive than wayback, if there is such a thing.
> Anyway, if anybody thinks they might be able to help, please let me
> know. Thanks!

The only archive of stuff like that that I am aware of it the "wayback"
machine you already tried.

The only other idea that I have is to try and subpoena either/both of:

1) Search engines, like Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc. Even if they don't
have an old cache (and why would they, search wants to be fresh), they
*might* have spider logs showing when they first found and index the new
section.

Also look for lesser known domain-specific search engines that focus on
whatever topic (e.g., video games) the site is about. Since they would
be smaller and more focused they might have better info. It's a smaller
haystack anyway.


2) The opposition's backups, around the time in question, for either
content for the new section (either in production or in revision
control), or logs showing when the new section started being served.


Good luck,
JP
----------------------------|:::======|-------------------------------
JP Vossen, CISSP |:::======| http://bashcookbook.com/
My Account, My Opinions |=========| http://www.jpsdomain.org/
----------------------------|=========|-------------------------------
"Microsoft Tax" = the additional hardware & yearly fees for the add-on
software required to protect Windows from its own poorly designed and
implemented self, while the overhead incidentally flattens Moore's Law.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages