OK -- I don't claim to be a Unix expert, but I always thought that the OS
had more granularity in terms of assigning execution rights and resources
used. All of the executables I have ever called for CGI services have been
in locations other than CGI-Bin (including Perl); the ASCII SCRIPTS are of
course located in CGI_bin.
Are you saying that it is NOT possible to restrict execution of binaries
from within CGI_Bin (e.g. under Linux). Also -- if you place rebol.exe in
the CGI-Bin, are you saying that you can run it via Telnet (I CANNOT do
this -- it violates security restrictions in place on the server).
Thanks.
At 07:19 PM 11/19/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Are you saying you think a Perl script is a binary executable?
>> You must have quite a liberal web host if he permits execution of arbitrary
>> binaries on a shared server!
>> Facts are a wonderful thing.
>
>No. Traditionally to execute a script you have a the first line of the
>script as something around the lines of;
>
>#!<commandname>
>
>which if the script file has a mode of at least 0111 or at least the
>executable bit set (that mode 0111 is world exec.) than the first line is
>interpreted. That command can be anything, granted on some OS' there are
>restrictions such as chroot() environments and other things like freebsd's
>jail() system calls which can limit the ammount of calls but typically any
>command can be run permissions granting. a perl script isnt just magicly
>interpreted. And for the matter anything put inside a cgi-bin that the
>owner of the web servers process has system permissions to execute can be
>executed.
>
>
>
>
