lol by all means please humor me btw~ please read all my message as well i cant read it if it aint there
> Read the rest of the thread leading up to it. If you still can't > understand why I was referring to security, then I will submit out of > shear frustration. > > -Matt > > On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 03:19 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Matt are you my brother? >> not only do you look like me but you have my temper as well, lol >> >> i read the mail as you put it >> "Who needs cffile or cfdirectory when you can use use java.io.File?" >> >> nothing in that to me suggested >> "disabling cffile and cfdirectory DOES NOT SECURE YOUR SERVER." >> >> although I could have missed a few threads as I seem to get many >> threads >> way after the fact if at all. >> sometimes I get the answers before the ?'s, kinda odd >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Please read these emails in context of their thread. I am not >>> suggesting that CFML developers use java.io.File instead of cffile or >>> cfdirectory. I am suggesting that disabling cffile and cfdirectory >>> DOES >>> NOT SECURE YOUR SERVER. >>> >>> -Matt >>> >>> On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 02:39 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> some of us dont know what that is matt. >>>> a lot of us dont know java & maybe dont have time to learn it. a lot >>>> of us need cffile. gawd knows i do:) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Who needs cffile or cfdirectory when you can use use java.io.File? >>>>> >>>>> -Matt >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 02:12 PM, Doug White wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Most Shared providers disable CFFILE and CFDIRECTORY anyway >>>>>> >>>>>> ====================================== >>>>>> Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! >>>>>> For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com >>>>>> Featuring Win2003 Enterprise, RedHat Linux, CFMX 6.1 and all >>>>>> databases. ISP rated: >>>>>> http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 >>>>>> Suggested corporate Anti-virus policy: >>>>>> http://www.dshield.org/antivirus.pdf >>>>>> ====================================== >>>>>> If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Ryan Kime" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:29 AM >>>>>> Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> | >I used the word "free".....they use the word "included" >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Semantics, I know, but here is the page I am referring to: | >>>>>> | http://www.uniserve.com/bus/usa/web/rates_glance.php?c=nt >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >Why should they use Enterprise if it's not required (i.e. >>>>>> clustering/load >>>>>> | balancing etc.). >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Hmmmm...maybe to keep other people from using your database >>>>>> connections and >>>>>> | your custom tags. Plus keep the general population on the server >>>>>> from using >>>>>> | cfdirectory/cffile outside their account's root. That's enough >>>>>> to make me >>>>>> | look elsewhere. >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> | -----Original Message----- >>>>>> | From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:07 AM >>>>>> | To: CF-Talk >>>>>> | Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Well Ryan they are absolutely great and in 5 years I have never >>>>>> had a CF >>>>>> | related problem that wasn't fixed within 15 minutes of it being >>>>>> found (and I >>>>>> | can count how many issues on one hand). >>>>>> | >>>>>> | I used the word "free".....they use the word "included". >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Why would you "run away" if they are using Pro/Standard? Why >>>>>> should >>>>>> they >>>>>> | use Enterprise if it's not required (i.e. clustering/load >>>>>> balancing etc.). >>>>>> | >>>>>> | These guys are a national ISP and can easily absorb the cost of >>>>>> the | software....that's how. >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Cheers >>>>>> | >>>>>> | Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. >>>>>> | VP & Director of E-Commerce Development >>>>>> | Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. >>>>>> | t. 250.920.8830 >>>>>> | e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> | >>>>>> | --------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> | Macromedia Associate Partner >>>>>> | www.macromedia.com >>>>>> | --------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> | Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group >>>>>> | Founder & Director >>>>>> | www.cfug-vancouverisland.com >>>>>> | ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> | From: "Ryan Kime" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> | To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> | Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 8:13 AM >>>>>> | Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> | > "There's no such thing as a free lunch" >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > I would be leery of *free* CF and SQL Server, both of those >>>>>> cost >>>>>> a >>>>>> | > pretty penny and are not easy to cover without passing some of >>>>>> the >>>>>> | > cost on to customers. It also makes me wonder why they use the >>>>>> term | > "FREE" and not "included" when describing their plans. | >>>>>> > | > Which version of CF are they using? If it's Pro/Standard and >>>>>> not >>>>>> | >>>>>> Enterprise, >>>>>> | > don't walk, but run away as fast as you can. >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > Ryan >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > -----Original Message----- >>>>>> | > From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 9:55 AM >>>>>> | > To: CF-Talk >>>>>> | > Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > Hey All, >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > Just thought I'd chime in here. >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > I've seen a lot of folks mentioning BlueDragon and how it may >>>>>> bring | > down hosting costs for CF. Well I'm not sure about the >>>>>> US, but CF is >>>>>> | > starting >>>>>> | to >>>>>> | > be offered for NO EXTRA CHARGE up here in Canada. >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > www.uniserve.com for example (and there are others). >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > NT Hosting with SQL Server 2000 and CFMX in a shared >>>>>> environment >>>>>> for >>>>>> | > about $35 CDN/month and they rock!! I've used the company >>>>>> they | >>>>>>> recently >>>>>> | acquired >>>>>> | > (Axion Internet) for the past 5 years and the service only got >>>>>> better >>>>>> | after >>>>>> | > the merger. Beleive it or not the SQL Server does not even >>>>>> add any | monthly >>>>>> | > cost...just a $25 CDN setup fee!! >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > So while BD may help bring other ISPs down to earth.....that >>>>>> move is >>>>>> | already >>>>>> | > happening here ;-) >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > Cheers >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. >>>>>> | > VP & Director of E-Commerce Development >>>>>> | > Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. >>>>>> | > t. 250.920.8830 >>>>>> | > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > --------------------------------------------------------- | > >>>>>> Macromedia Associate Partner >>>>>> | > www.macromedia.com >>>>>> | > --------------------------------------------------------- | > >>>>>> Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group >>>>>> | > Founder & Director >>>>>> | > www.cfug-vancouverisland.com >>>>>> | > ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> | > From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> | > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> | > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 6:54 PM >>>>>> | > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > > For me, I wouldn't at the moment just because I'm very happy >>>>>> where I >>>>>> | > > am (CrystalTech). >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > > However BlueDragon has the definite potential to bring CF >>>>>> hosting | > > prices down significantly (one of the complaints I >>>>>> here about CF) so >>>>>> | > > I would really like to see it offered by a few hosts. >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > > As Vince pointed out in a branch from this thread BlueDragon >>>>>> also | > > makes excellent sense for somebody that wants to >>>>>> package their CF | > > application for use on a server lacking CF >>>>>> (which can >>>>>> be in either >>>>>> | > > J2EE or, soon, .NET). >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > > Although this market has traditionally been very small with >>>>>> CF >>>>>> Blue >>>>>> | > > Dragon may expand it greatly. >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > > Jim Davis >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > > > -----Original Message----- >>>>>> | > > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> | > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 11:28 AM >>>>>> | > > > To: CF-Talk >>>>>> | > > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > There is another question in the whole Bluedragon debate. >>>>>> How >>>>>> | > > > many of >>>>>> | > > us >>>>>> | > > > would move our site(s) to a hosting company using BD >>>>>> instead >>>>>> of MM >>>>>> | > > > ColdFusion? >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt >>>>>> | > > > Webapper Services LLC >>>>>> | > > > Web Site http://www.webapper.com >>>>>> | > > > Blog http://www.webapper.net >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Webapper <Web Application Specialists> >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > -----Original Message----- >>>>>> | > > > From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > >>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 7:56 AM >>>>>> | > > > To: CF-Talk >>>>>> | > > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > > -----Original Message----- >>>>>> | > > > > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> | > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 2:16 AM >>>>>> | > > > > To: CF-Talk >>>>>> | > > > > Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>>>>> | > > > > >>>>>> | > > > > > If your clients are small enough where the cost of CF >>>>>> is >>>>>> | >>>>>>>> prohibitive >>>>>> | > > > it >>>>>> | > > > > > may be likely that the cost of managing an Intranet is >>>>>> also | > > > prohibitive >>>>>> | > > > > > (although they may be doing it anyway and have never >>>>>> done a | > > > > > cost analysis). >>>>>> | > > > > > >>>>>> | > > > > I'll agree with that, but certainly the use of certain >>>>>> software >>>>>> | > > > > e.g. >>>>>> | > > > CF >>>>>> | > > > > could be what tips the scale. If that is the case, then >>>>>> a | >>>>>>>>>> cheaper implementation of CFML (BlueDragon) can certainly >>>>>> help >>>>>> | > > > > in that >>>>>> | > > regard. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > It definitely has an effect, but in most cases (and >>>>>> certainly not >>>>>> | > > > in CF's case) the cost of software is very small compared >>>>>> to >>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> maintenance and general infrastructure costs. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Even managing a small, single Intranet server using free >>>>>> software >>>>>> | > > > can >>>>>> | > > be >>>>>> | > > > (often surprisingly) very costly once you do a full >>>>>> resource >>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> map/prediction - especially when extended to the life of the | >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> server. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > All that being said every little bit does help. ;^) If >>>>>> software >>>>>> | > > costs >>>>>> | > > > are lower then you total project costs COULD definitely be >>>>>> lower >>>>>> | > > > (but often aren't due to other factors not commonly taken >>>>>> into >>>>>> | > > > account). >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > > > Many hosting companies are hosting their Intranet at >>>>>> "public" >>>>>> | > > hosts >>>>>> | > > > for >>>>>> | > > > > > this reason. There are some hosts that do nothing but >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> traditional Intranet applications along with email >>>>>> (Exchange >>>>>> | > > > > > hosting, for >>>>>> | > > > example, >>>>>> | > > > > > is pretty common due to the cost and complexity of >>>>>> managing an >>>>>> | > > > Exchange >>>>>> | > > > > > server). >>>>>> | > > > > > >>>>>> | > > > > That may be, but there are serious issues with >>>>>> outsourcing >>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>> internal >>>>>> | > > IT >>>>>> | > > > > resources externally that many of these companies may >>>>>> not be >>>>>> | > > > > aware >>>>>> | > > of. >>>>>> | > > > > One example of this is that their WAN connection becomes >>>>>> a >>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>> single >>>>>> | > > > point >>>>>> | > > > > of failure. Then of course there are legality issues >>>>>> related >>>>>> to >>>>>> | > > giving >>>>>> | > > > > non-employees access to sensitive data that aren't under >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> specific consulting agreements, which is the case when your | > >>>>>>>>> email is hosted >>>>>> | > > by >>>>>> | > > > a >>>>>> | > > > > 3rd party. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > All true - this all depends, of course, on how much the >>>>>> company | > > > wants >>>>>> | > > to >>>>>> | > > > spend as well. If you want to get away more cheaply >>>>>> you'll be >>>>>> | > > > sacrificing some things. A full "bullet-proof" system >>>>>> will always >>>>>> | > > cost >>>>>> | > > > more. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > > > No, consider an Intranet with is planned to contain, >>>>>> let's >>>>>> | > > > > > say, >>>>>> | > > six >>>>>> | > > > > > distinct applications (not at all uncommon). My case >>>>>> now is >>>>>> | > > > > > that >>>>>> | > > > each >>>>>> | > > > > > of these applications only has to save two hours of | >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> development >>>>>> | > > time >>>>>> | > > > > > due >>>>>> | > > > > > to CF for it to be just as cost effective as a "free" >>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> solution. >>>>>> | > > > > > >>>>>> | > > > > Of course, the case with BlueDragon would only need to >>>>>> save one >>>>>> | > > > > hour per application. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > True. I'm not arguing against Blue Dragon but rather the >>>>>> concept >>>>>> | > > > that software costs (at this level) are major >>>>>> considerations. >>>>>> Too >>>>>> | > > > many >>>>>> | > > times >>>>>> | > > > I've heard "we can't afford CF" only to watch a company >>>>>> spends >>>>>> | > > thousands >>>>>> | > > > more pursuing an untried "free" solution. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > The problem here is almost always one of training and | > >>>>>> > > applicability. >>>>>> | > > A >>>>>> | > > > company that has great Linux/PostGres/PHP people will, of >>>>>> course, >>>>>> | > > > use them. But a company looking for a solution often >>>>>> gravitates to >>>>>> | > > > free software due to cost concerns. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Developers are then in the position of learning these >>>>>> tools as >>>>>> | > > > they develop - which ends up costing far, far more in the >>>>>> long >>>>>> run >>>>>> | > > > than setting up, for example, a Windows environment that >>>>>> they may >>>>>> | > > > have some experience with. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > For a medium/large company this isn't a problem as the >>>>>> extra >>>>>> time >>>>>> | > > > can >>>>>> | > > be >>>>>> | > > > split with R&D/Training and down the road you do gain. >>>>>> But for | > > > the >>>>>> | > > very >>>>>> | > > > small company this often locks them into a money-pit; >>>>>> tying them >>>>>> | > > > into >>>>>> | > > a >>>>>> | > > > solution they don't know and resulting either in a failed >>>>>> project >>>>>> | > > > or >>>>>> | > > one >>>>>> | > > > that doesn't meet expectations. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Many of them are roped in by contractors that claim they >>>>>> can >>>>>> "pick >>>>>> | > > > up" something easily. My advice to small business is >>>>>> always >>>>>> stick >>>>>> | > > > with >>>>>> | > > what >>>>>> | > > > you know and always pay extra for gurus. >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > Jim Davis >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > > >>>>>> | > > >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
