Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: internetconnection.net

Stories and comments across the archive that link to internetconnection.net.

Comments · 8

  1. Re:Ewww... by slim · · Score: 1 · on Sergey Brin: Windows Is "Torturing Users"

    Vi in Javascript? Why not? http://gpl.internetconnection.net/vi/

    GCC in Javascript would be a foolish enterprise, but remote compilation is more than just viable -- it's a good idea.

  2. Re:Project files? Now we hide the source files! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative · on Web-based IDEs Edge Closer To the Mainstream

    You *had* to ask, didn't you?

    http://robrohan.com/projects/9ne/

    And just to keep the vi vs. emacs rivalry well fueled:

    http://gpl.internetconnection.net/vi/

  3. Re:off your central topic, but... by obender · · Score: 2, Informative · on Firefox 4 Will Push Edges of Browser Definition

    Do you know how many times I've wished for vi style editing in text boxes?
    Here you have vi in a text area.

  4. Re:yeah right by mrsbrisby · · Score: 1 · on PHP In Action: Objects, Design, Agility

    My criticism of PHP is that it's just a very poorly implemented copy of Microsoft's old-fashioned ASP model.
    PHP/FI came out in 1995, while ASP came out in 1996.

    Even if the language and implementation didn't suck, the model is still ancient and clunky. Heck, even Microsoft abandoned the ASP model in favor of ASP.NET over 6 years ago.
    Well, not really. ASP.NET still makes many of the same mistakes that PHP does. While yes, it is possible to separate code and data for application, session, and documents, it still is easier to avoid making the distinction. This makes it impossible to tell what's a "safe" url, and to adequately describe what a document can do. PHP tried to introduce "safe mode" and "magic quoting", but because the semantics are simply too complicated for the people who need php to "just be easy", they don't get used, and because they don't get used, they don't save anybody anything. It's 2008 and new programs are still requiring register globals.

    However, draconian approaches are possible: I wrote SiteSafe specifically to deal with this: Most PHP applications don't need to access the filesystem. They use MySQL calls so any access to the filesystem (besides sessions) is either the author updating the site, or its an attacker who has broken your application. SiteSafe can fix this problem easily by simply denying access to the filesystem.

    PHP could do something more portably: Require a permissions mask be encoded at the top of every php tag that says what permissions would be required for the block. For example, <?php f=fopen("foo.txt","r") ?> could become <?php[open-existing-file-read] f=fopen("foo.txt","r") ?>. This would encourage programmers to do less in each block, and include better semantic signatures. Including all permissions would be more typing than they would ordinarily be willing, and automated tools could be made trivially to establish risk-vectors for PHP applications. Any attempt to set these permissions sitewide would put a red box at the top of every page that says This application is running with increased privileges so that the application author would be encouraged to audit and fix their application.

    Of course, PHP developers don't know how to add two numbers so I doubt this would ever happen...
  5. Depends on what you're doing by mrsbrisby · · Score: 3, Informative · on Building Your First Cluster?

    Clustering means too many different things these days. I operate several clusters- but they're all so different that I can't say that any of them are the same.

    I run ClamAV and Spamassassin- both very slow programs- with cexec which simply lets me farm regular unix tools across multiple (lots) of CPU servers. This lets me replace the clamscan and spamc programs with "wrappers" that use my farm. I like cexec because it doesn't make me create lists of clients and servers, but automatically load balances and fails out very nicely.

    For my frontend web servers, I use fake/heartbeat and some custom proxy software for routing frontend requests to backend farms.

    I haven't found a real reliable replicated directory- with one, I could use cexec as a filesystem... Maybe some day...

  6. Another Update? by squidguy · · Score: 1 · on Initial Reactions to Fedora Core 5

    Oops...better run Windows. Errr...maybe not. Back to UNICS (http://support.internetconnection.net/DEFINITIONS /Definition_of_Unix.html).

  7. NTBACKUP is JUST FINE by mrsbrisby · · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Releases Public Beta of Data Protection

    We use NTBACKUP and mtftar with great success. With a SYSPREPP'd install disk, restoring a kaput Windows machine takes about 20-30 minutes. With mtftar, we can cherry-pick files without booting a windows machine.

    NTBACKUP can create ".bkf" files that surely, aren't as fast to create as shadow-volumes, and incrementals aren't useful for large files (like rsync), but they have advantage is that they can be stored on a remote machine on the cheap!

  8. odd thread this follows... by mrsbrisby · · Score: 2 · on Webhosting Control Panels?

    i've noticed a lot of people pumping up all kinds of products; free ones, proprietary, and even a bunch of asses advertising their own hosting provider (couldn't resist, but at least i admit i'm an ass.), but the question of whether there are similar projects out there...

    webmin and similar products don't count, because if you don't know unix, you shouldn't run it, let alone administer it, LET ALONE THAT, and try and run a business using it.

    web hosting is a business. no mather which way you look, and while I have found several (many of the ones listed elsewhere on this page), most tend to coerce you into using their hosting solution(tm), instead of bending to your system.

    if you're serious about doing web-hosting, build a platform. take redhat, or debian, or solaris, or whatever you like/know, and build your system. use whatever components you feel comfortable with; but don't worry about a gui. make shell scripts for your timid users. writing a few dozen perl/shell scripts to help out users is a good idea(tm), and if you absolutely want a web-based interface, it's a simple matter to write some web-glue for that.

    truth here: if you think you can build a successful web-hosting company _without_ spending time on it (e.g. purchasing your components), you've definately got another thing coming, and you will run into it sooner or later.

    so take my advise, give the users the capacity for control first, then make your own damn pages to actually make it easy on them. any other route spells disaster for the future.

    and as a closing note, i *hate* all those 3$...5$...10$ hosting providers with a unprofessional-looking website, and some shoddy NT/IIS based or Redhat+RedhatServer(blah) garbage (hacked in five flat. guaranteed), and expect to stick around. all they do is waste people's time... and if you fuck up early, you'll make it harder on yourself in the future.