> Well now, since you'all have brought it up, and I never
> really considered it, (big IIS fan)....which is better on
> a Win2k (advanced server)?
>
> IIS or Apache?
>
> Pros - Cons?
> Good for both Development and Production?
>
> Would consider shelving IIS for Apache if there was good
> reason to....
>From a functional perspective, both will work fine on Win2K, especially for
development. I think that IIS will perform better in production than Apache
on Windows, based on my experiences. This shouldn't be a surprise, since
Microsoft has built IIS specifically to run very well on Windows.
>From a security perspective, Apache is easier to secure than IIS, although
both can be secured adequately. Apache doesn't come with all kinds of extra
stuff like IIS does, so you don't have to remove and disable as much. There
are some people who think that IIS can't be secured
(http://www.securityportal.com/articles/iis20010521.html), but it can be
with a bit of diligence. The only "fatal flaw" with IIS, in my opinion, is
that the service must run as SYSTEM so that it can impersonate other users -
if I understand correctly, this is required to support the integration of
IIS authentication with NT authentication. So, if the IIS service gets
compromised through a buffer overflow, any code executed as a result will
run as SYSTEM. Actually, in Win2K, you might be able to change the IIS
services so that they run as individual users. I haven't tried this yet,
myself.
If you're interested in taking advantage of Windows-specific functionality,
IIS will allow you to do that more easily and more often than Apache,
generally.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
