On Fri, 16 Jun 2006, Matt Grommes wrote:
> From: Matt Grommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:03:48 -0600 > Subject: Re: [Mason] Alternatives to CGI on shared hosting > > Eric Windisch wrote: > > We give every user their own Apache service running as their user. At > > the cost of additional server resources, this provides a very capable > > work around for all of the problems with mod_perl in a shared hosting > > environment. Additionally, we've found that average memory usage for > > users of mod_perl is also very light, at least compared to the other > > services we offer. > > Not to pick nits but is this really "shared hosting"? Giving everybody their > own apache is just like > putting them on separate servers. Just because you have them on one box is > your implementation, and > doesn't really contradict what the book says. Running the usual shared system > of virtual hosts does > in fact potentially lead to the problems outlined. > > Like I said, this is probably nitpicking. Your post was basically an > advertisement so feel free to > ignore me. Does he mean that their apache child processes do setuid for each user? Would that protect against the problem? Mark _______________________________________________ Mason-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-users
