I have a small reseller account but all the domains are managed by myself. Security has not been a problem because the sites are simple, but now I have a need to deliver and recieve private files. I know how to keep the website itself secure writing my own sessions, using explicit variables, storing sensitive data outside of the web directories and that sort of stuff but it is my 'neighbors' that bother me. If one of them gets hacked or I get a bad neighbor sharing the server I do not want them to have access to my files and passwords.
A few years ago I wrote a browsing script that I found out had the ability to escape my own area and roam freely around every area on the server with unlimited access to every file. When I complained about it, the server admin said that I had nothing to worry about. When I pressed the issue I was told that nobody could invade my files because it was against the rules to go into other people's account. It turned out most server administrators left things open to eliminate scripting problems for their users and there was really no way to lock down a server without breaking a lot of scripts. At the time I moved to a more secure server but they eventually opened things up because of too many complaints and help requests.
Have things changed? Have they worked out the issues with shared servers? Is there a way to tell if my host has implemented proper safeguards (if any viable ones exist)?
If I used the PHP mediawiki script and I had10,000 wiki articles, and 2 million users were browsing my site which is hosted on two Dedicated servers that are P4 Quad Core 2.6GHZ 4GB RAM 100Mbit dedicated port with a load balancer, would my servers handle this amount of simultaneous users and how fast would each wiki article take to load when all these 2million users are online if each article was 300KB?
And what is the maximum number of users online at the same do you think these 2 servers could handle?
I've created many vpn connections in the past using private ip addresses allocated automatically but I haven't really found much on making a vpn server that hands out a dedicated ip address.
The problem: Basically, I have Windows Server 2003 x64 Enterprise and an extra public IP address that is unblocked from the internet. I have a private server (Windows Server 2003 Enterprise R2 i386) sitting here at home that is behind many firewalls (both my isp and my own) that controls my x10 light system, etc.
I have custom written software so that within my home network, I can goto my server's IP address via a web browser and http address and bring up a control panel that controls my lights, etc. Everything works great, but when I'm on my mobile phone, I cannot access this nice control panel because it is on the internet outside of my home network.
I am wondering if there is a way to configure my public web server to act as a VPN server, accept public requests from this IP address and forward them onto my private home server that would have a vpn established 24x7. I haven't found much documentation on doing this, and I'm not entirely sure what to search for.
sitea.com was pointing to /home/me/public_html/sitea
siteb.com was pointing to /home/me/public_html/siteb
On my new server, I have root permissions and used Plesk to create two domains sitea.com and siteb.com . Now plesk asks for a user to be created for each domain, so created usera and userb for sitea and siteb respectively.
Now as root on my server I created the dir /home/me/ and untarred the whole backup from old server to new server and I have dirs :
/home/me/public_html/sitea and /home/me/public_html/siteb
In apache configuration in file: httpd.include_sitea under dir /var/www/vhosts/sitea.com/conf/httpd.include
I changed the document root to /home/me/public_html/sitea
So I thought I am all set. But it does not work. When I try sitea.com in the browser it works but for all subdirs, for eg sitea.com/images it says Access denied.
This is because the dirs I created are owned by root.
So the owner of /home/me/public_html/sitea needs to be usera for this to work ?
Again for siteb to work I need to change the owner of /home/me/public_html/siteb to userb ?
This will be painful ? At least I should be able to change the owner of /home/me/public_html/ to one owner and ensure all sites under that work fine. How do I do that ?
I think the problem is clear by now. Its that I want all my sites to work off from .../public_html/ sub dirs.
i had an p4 2.8g db server, centos4+mysql4.1. the cpu usage went up to 9X% at peak time (web pages loaded within 2~3sec), so i decide to swtich to a new server with a faster cpu. the new box is core 2 duo e6600, centos5+mysql5.0, having same RAM and HD with the old box. surprisingly , the cpu usage keeps above 150% almost all the time, and web pages cost 10+seconds to load at peak time.
how is it possible? what is the problem here? is the cpu, os, or mysql?
I currently have godaddy dedicated server and the 100mbps connection is shared with other servers, and I pay about $120 a month. I normally get an average of 30mbps out of it. Do you guys know of any cheap hosting companies that offer dedicated servers with a 1Gbps shared connection? And the main point I'm trying to get to is, do you guys know of any web hosts that would be faster than an average of 30mbps, even if they're only 100mbps shared connections? I'd really appreciate any potential hosts you guys can direct me to that are pretty fast.
if Web servers might prioritize servicing Regular GET or a Conditional GET.
I have seen busy servers take 9 seconds to respond with a (304 Not modified). On fast networks (LANs), the file size is no issue and, it seems that a (200 OK) with the object is downloaded faster than the (304 Not modified) response alone.
I am currently with a smaller US-provider where I am running a dedicated gentoo server with a dozen domains (all small stuff, mostly sme/private websites) and 2 dozen email accounts.
The nice thing about the current provider is that he lets me run sub-accounts where the holders of those accounts have their own billing. I let them run a domain/website on my server since its no extra cost for them, but they pay for the domain and extra email space for example w/o me having to care for it. They basically offer a minimum package and add every single thing on top of it, which I like since I do not need any webpage builders, templates whatever else. I rather only pay what I take.
Basically I am happy except for the connection speed, specially for the email. I am in Asia and other people using this server from Europe, and the time it takes to connect, up/download data to the server and to download larger emails is simply out of the normal.
any recommendations there? I am currently paying 75 USD/Mo + domain names. I think this is also a bit on the high side given that the server hardware is a bit out of date by now.
I am looking at the minimum to relocate only the email hosting to some faster service, which would have to have a reasonable storage size (>= gmail) with POP/IMAP access and of course to use my own domain names.
We used Red Hat with ext2 as our file system on an old server with 100k+ of image files in a single directory. This seemed to preform ok until we switched to FreeBSD using UFS. Now images load very slow. I have read that Ext2 uses and internal hash to speed lookups, while UFS does linear searches for lookups.
On my server, users can connect to any database as long as they have the database user and password. This makes it easier to hack any database on the server. What I want to do is to make the users can only connect to their own databases and not other's.
I tried changing the localhost ip address but it didn't work ( I assume I didn't do it the right way)
I'm making a reasonably uninformed comparison here. Since Windows Vista is noted to be more resource intensive and slower than Win XP, are we right in assuming that Windows 2008 is slower than Windows 2003?
For instance, with two boxes with an identical hardware setup but the two different server OSes, will the same application like, say MySQL run slower on the Win 2008 machine?
I have a few system administrators having full access to the Windows 2003 servers. I fear some of them might be messing up with the server like opening websites on the server or downloading files on the server. I want to create unprivileged users to login to the server so that they can do the basic tasks like reading the log files etc. Can anybody give me the steps for the same?
we have a WHM account... we have different accounts on that...and for each account, there are add-on domains underneath that. (i hope you know what i mean)
and we set it up to use only SFTP to connect to server. no FTP.
after we have set it up that way, it seems that we can only connect to SFTP using 1 user/pass for each account... that is the same user/pass we use for Cpanel of each account.
say, i have Account A... under Account A, i have addon domains: A1.com, A2.com, A3.com... setting SFTP only on that server, all those addon domains of Account A, can only use 1 user/pass to login to SFTP which is the cpanel access also of Account A.
question is.... is this behavior correct??
how can we create a different user for each add-on domain?
with webmin can I use it to add FTP users to say pure ftpd? and does it work with lighttpd? If I'm thinking about it right webmin just allows us to control the service and modify the configuration files right?
I hope this is in the correct section. Secondly, here is my issue that I am hoping someone can help with. I run a fairly successful video streaming site with several thousand members, and several thousand videos. I am trying to determine how many users I have online at any given time. Does anyone know of a piece of software/code out there that can provide me with this information in real time?
Does anyone have an experience with this host? In my search I found several favorable comments. I've been collecting different hosts names to consider from those of you kind enough to post them on your signatures. I'm with A Small Orange and am looking for a backup host, or will change the DNS to the backup if they are better.
Others I am considering are Aspire and Known Host. I'll need a shared plan. My site is anywhere from 350 to 450MB's. I try to get twice the space I need because I can have a spike here and there since clients are always downloading my voice files for their projects.