DavidFraiser

That’s why using a child theme (containing a functions.php with the custom code – different from the parent theme’s functions.php) is recommended.

For right now I’m just adding the CSS directly into the child style.css, and that’s working perfectly. I’m migrating a site that was written using Bootstrap2, and your theme/framework has been the easiest to accomplish that.

At some point in the future I’ll reinstall your theme (a fresh copy) on another test site and recreate the changes, taking screenshots of any errors WinLESS reports and send them to you. I do very much appreciate your offer to help, thank you.

I’m right there with you! For people who just want to click buttons, it would probably be great. But forget about having any sort of control over the design.

Thanks for the reply. From what I could find on StackOverflow, etc it’s a common error. Most people ignore them, but I don’t like to ignore coding errors.

And thank you for the offer to look at the directory, but that really wouldn’t solve anything. It isn’t rocket science, I have WinLESS open, I edit the .LESS file, the compiler “crunches” it into CSS, which I upload to the site. The errors two different compilers are reporting have to do with files I haven’t touched. The only files I editted were custom.less and navbar.less. The compiler(s) didn’t report any errors in those.

I 3rd it.

I can confirm this is still an issue. Best course is to whitelist Automattic’s IP range (Marcelo listed above), rather than remove the Mod_Sec rule (because it’s a valid rule).

You realize you don’t need a plugin in order to add an external CSS file, right? Simply edit your (child) theme’s header.php.

Thank you for the reply, I’ll take your word for it. I found another plugin for what I need.

Update: It did, until upgrading to WP 3.9.

Just to add my .02 in, I had the same issue as the OP when I deleted the slug. I clicked on the Gallery settings inside the admin panel, and it forwarded me to the docroot.

Thanks for the reply.

So in other words, the error was *not* fixed/included in the most recent release (v.2.2.4 or 2.2.5)?

I don’t have Jetpack on my site. My concern was the vast amount of WP sites I see with this error. I was concerned it might be a new vulnerability, rather than just a coding error, since it’s surprising it’s so pervasive.

I notice this error/bug report is 2 months old and the latest version of Jetpack was released 5-1-13. I also noticed that there’s a whole lot of major sites showing this error. To your knowledge (and I realize it might be hard to tell), does this mean they just have updated? Or was the error not fixed in the 5-1-13 release?

These are major, high traffic sites I’m seeing this on, including https://www.addictinginfo.org/ and one would think they would have noticed.

https://www.google.com/#safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=Warning:+Illegal+string+offset+%27src%27+in+public_html%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fjetpack%2Fmodules%2Fwidgets%2Ftop-posts.php+on+line+179

I realize this is an old thread, but it’s still relevant. I’m consistently amazed at both the lack of knowledge of many users, and also the willingness to immediately assume “it must be something funky the hosting company is doing.”

Seriously?

ModSecurity is a set of rules designed to protect your website/WordPress blog. Yes, there are times it needs to be tweaked/adjusted, as there will never be any security system/firewall that’s a plug-and-play one-size-fits-all.

Beyond that, the OP stated the site worked fine in Firefox but not in ie9. That right there should have been a clue it was NOT something the web hosting company did!

The fact is, there’s *many* potential issues along the way. It could be a WordPress issue, could be a ModSecurity issue, a firewall issue, and server software (of which there are hundreds) upgrade compatibility issue. I’ll wholeheartedly agree that it sounds like the hosting tech support was a little too quick to say there was no problem on their end…but we also don’t know how detailed you were in your requests, etc. Then again, at less than $10 a month, you get what you pay for.

My general point (and yes, I do have one) is that time and time and time again in this forum and others, I see users taking about 30 seconds to research their issue, and if the answer doesn’t smack them in the face, then it must be the host’s fault. If you buy a car, you take the time to learn how to drive it, and many years perfecting that skill. Put at least as much effort into learning what you’re doing when you install a script that’s on the Internet and a target to every hacker over the age of 5.