[gentoo-user] Re: Compatibility with Kernel 2.6.9

[Nikos Chantziaras]

Alan McKinnon wrote:

On Thursday 26 March 2009 21:30:57 Florian Philipp wrote:


About a year ago a company I worked for was consulted to maintain a
hospital admin system running on SLES of about that era in a VM. We told
them to upgrade or find somebody else. They went off on their merry way
to find somebody else...

I'll ask them as soon as I know more about how Gentoo works on this.


You mentioned elsewhere in the thread web server

If that's the case, I'd be telling the hosting provider that 2004 called and 
they want their minutes back. Then I'd be looking for a different hosting 
provider.


If indeed they're running off 2004 software, I would be interested to 
know how many times people are defacing (or worse) sites hosted there :P

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Compatibility with Kernel 2.6.9

[Mike Kazantsev]

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:19:13 +0200
Nikos Chantziaras rea...@arcor.de wrote:

 Alan McKinnon wrote:
 
  You mentioned elsewhere in the thread web server
  
  If that's the case, I'd be telling the hosting provider that 2004 called 
  and 
  they want their minutes back. Then I'd be looking for a different hosting 
  provider.
 
 If indeed they're running off 2004 software, I would be interested to 
 know how many times people are defacing (or worse) sites hosted there :P

If the server itself is http-backend (with ssh forwarded, too), located
in dmz, what's the big deal?

You can have latest and fairly secure apache/lighttpd/nginx/whatever
out there, and, provided there are no holes in your scripts, the setup
should be fairly secure.
And that's probably most used line-of-defence on any web, since there's
nothing more important for webserver than scripts - if you have www, you
pretty much have it all.

-- 
Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature