Re: [WebDNA] WebDNA future
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2010
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 104460
interpreted = N
texte = First, thanks for the comments. christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >> With sandboxes, an admin has the ability to limit how a user can interact with the rest of the server, particularly with DOS,SHELL,Applescript, file paths et al. Has this sort of thing been addressed with the fastCGI app that will most likely run in virtual host situation? I don't know of anyone that will want to install an app in a shared host enviro that will have the ability to fish around the entire server. Knowing Jaz though, I'm guessing he has already thought of this and addressed this.?? It seems like the only solution there is relative paths only, as not all domains will have different user and groups. > > The fastCGI has shell access if the administrator provides shell access to the user. On the contrary to the module version which needs the same permissions as apache (to be able to interact with apache files), a CGI runs with a single website permissions. This allows a webmaster to limit the range of the application, which will not be allowed to interact with other websites files. This greatly improves the security compared to the module. Chris, can you explain what you mean by "if an admin provides shell access to the user"? That is what WebDNA does... so not sure what you mean. >> Contrary to what was said, there *are* many who still use commands.. mostly because there are many who run SiteBuilder stores (which use commands). Now, I personally think SiteBuilder is outdated and needs an upgrade, particularly replacing the commands with contexts... However, the fact remains that it is functional, people use it, people make money with it, and yes, if done right, it can be secure. I know people use commands because I have worked on some of those sites. If commands are to be taken out of all the versions of WebDNA, those sites are dead in the water without reworks and the SiteBuilder product becomes a dead product without a rework. >> (Fine with me if that is the case, but significant none the less to quite a few, and something people may want a heads up on) > > this is why we will deliver a 6.2.1 module version. We are also working on the SiteBuilder. O.K., it's just still unclear to me what the module app type will look like. Will it still contain all the stuff that is going away in the fastCGI app type? >> Also, I personally utilize a lot of the (extended) features of the module based app.. globals and sandboxes in particular.. so I personally don't want to see those go away in the module-based app. > > Because of the very core of the fastCGI, there will be no need for globals or sandboxes: every single website owner will have full control over his WebDNA fastCGI copy, license included. No need for a "part" administration, or a central repository of functions. > > - chris--------------------------------------------------------- O.K., but if you notice, I was talking about the module-based app. Will it still contain a globals directory? Thanks, Donovan -- Donovan Brooke WebDNA Software Corporation http://www.webdna.us **[Square Bracket Utopia]**
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
First, thanks for the comments. christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >> With sandboxes, an admin has the ability to limit how a user can interact with the rest of the server, particularly with DOS,SHELL,Applescript, file paths et al. Has this sort of thing been addressed with the fastCGI app that will most likely run in virtual host situation? I don't know of anyone that will want to install an app in a shared host enviro that will have the ability to fish around the entire server. Knowing Jaz though, I'm guessing he has already thought of this and addressed this.?? It seems like the only solution there is relative paths only, as not all domains will have different user and groups. > > The fastCGI has shell access if the administrator provides shell access to the user. On the contrary to the module version which needs the same permissions as apache (to be able to interact with apache files), a CGI runs with a single website permissions. This allows a webmaster to limit the range of the application, which will not be allowed to interact with other websites files. This greatly improves the security compared to the module. Chris, can you explain what you mean by "if an admin provides shell access to the user"? That is what WebDNA does... so not sure what you mean. >> Contrary to what was said, there *are* many who still use commands.. mostly because there are many who run SiteBuilder stores (which use commands). Now, I personally think SiteBuilder is outdated and needs an upgrade, particularly replacing the commands with contexts... However, the fact remains that it is functional, people use it, people make money with it, and yes, if done right, it can be secure. I know people use commands because I have worked on some of those sites. If commands are to be taken out of all the versions of WebDNA, those sites are dead in the water without reworks and the SiteBuilder product becomes a dead product without a rework. >> (Fine with me if that is the case, but significant none the less to quite a few, and something people may want a heads up on) > > this is why we will deliver a 6.2.1 module version. We are also working on the SiteBuilder. O.K., it's just still unclear to me what the module app type will look like. Will it still contain all the stuff that is going away in the fastCGI app type? >> Also, I personally utilize a lot of the (extended) features of the module based app.. globals and sandboxes in particular.. so I personally don't want to see those go away in the module-based app. > > Because of the very core of the fastCGI, there will be no need for globals or sandboxes: every single website owner will have full control over his WebDNA fastCGI copy, license included. No need for a "part" administration, or a central repository of functions. > > - chris--------------------------------------------------------- O.K., but if you notice, I was talking about the module-based app. Will it still contain a globals directory? Thanks, Donovan -- Donovan Brooke WebDNA Software Corporation http://www.webdna.us **[Square Bracket Utopia]**
Donovan Brooke
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Help name our technology! I found it (1997)
Multiple products Multiple price (2000)
[WebDNA] Test (2019)
Nesting format tags (1997)
WebCat2: multiple currency support (1997)
WebCatalog can't find database (1997)
mass mailing (1998)
Security Issue (1997)
Nested tags count question (1997)
Webcatalog acgi conflict? (1999)
two forms of delivery (1998)
Press Release hit the NewsWire!!! (1997)
[DOS]/DOS query perhaps OT (2003)
FYI: virus alert (1996)
Variables not being passed *back* (2000)
RE: Which [index]? (1997)
Conditional searching & displaying (1997)
Encoding information to send through TCPConnect (1999)
Calendar using WebCatalog? (1997)
Re:webCatalog and Stocks (1998)