My original posting ,
We have a web hosting service which offers a normal FTP access to clients to
update their web hosts on Solaris 2.6 with Netscape Enterprise web server. I
was thinking to add Microsoft Frontpage2000 extensions on that web server to
enable clients update their files directly from FrontPage client installed
on their PCs without the need to FTP.
I have installed these extensions on an evaluation server running Solaris
2.6 too, it seems to be working fine.
Has anyone any experience in that ,is there anything I have to keep in mind
before having this in production in terms of security ...etc, please advise.
Thank you for all who responded
Andy De Petter
Claudio Cuestas
Otto, Doug
Some had bad experience and others had no problems with the extensions.
Here are the replies :
----------------------------------
Andy De Petter
We had nothing but bad experiences with this software. Just keep in
mind that when you create a new root web for your customers, the
frontpage installation replaces ALL permissions on ALL of the
homedirectories of your users, which will cause many many headaches for
the administrator of that box =)
We had the problem a couple of times, that the homedirectories of
serveral users where "suddenly" chowned by another user, etc.. etc...
-------------------------------------
Claudio Cuestas
Here is my experience...
I run a shared webserver with over 1000 webservers.
We have had installed FP98 extensions for a couple of years now.
We also a couple of weeks ago added FP2K extension in addition to the FP89
extensions "this was not an upgrade".
Lots of people still like FP98 better than FP2K.
Perhaps my problem is becuase I am running both sets of extensions but,
I am experiencing the following....
On the webservers which have FP2k installed...
They are able to create, modify and use every single FP2K feature.
But when you check on the client side de properties of the web, it
indicates that the server is running with FP98 extensions.
Now, this really makes no sense to me due to the fact that if in fact the
webserver was running with FP98 extensions it would not have been able to
use any of the FP2k features.
Maybe something to keep in mind, perhaps as I mentioned above this could
be because I am running both sets of extensions?? I am not sure yet, I am
in the process of figuring this out.
More to come at a later time...
ps, by the way, I run 2.6 also and apache
-----------------------------------------
Otto, Doug
I run FP extensions on an Intranet site running Solaris 7 and Apache. It is
working well for us. The only caution I would offer is that you make the
box Frontpage only. Meaning, don't allow shell and or FTP to FP controlled
"webs." Frontpage will maintain fairly consistent permissions as long as
you don't confuse it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:14:05 CDT