[users@httpd] apchae not starting with jew1.4

I hav a wierd problem recently we moved from jre1.3 to jre 1.4 we configed all the JAVA_HOME and PATH parameters correctly. we prepared a .bat file that looks like this: java -Djava.endorsed.dirs="..\common\endorsed"-classpath "\bootstrap.jar" -Dcatalina.base=".." -Dcatalina.home=".." -D

Re: [users@httpd] weird httpd processes

hi all... i started this a few weeks ago.. the situation hasn't been improving... i'm getting really frustrated. i've looked for scripts but i can not find anything wrong. besides there are about 150 domains on that machine and i can't go through each php or pearl file i woke up today to abou

Re: [users@httpd] This release is compatible with modules compiled for 2.0.42 and later versions.

Many thanks Joshua. I will probably have to wipe the redhat version because they don't appear to offer an upgrade to Apache unless I switch to their 'Enterprise' version. Sincerely Tom Sayers - The official User-To-User sup

Re: [users@httpd] This release is compatible with modules compiled for 2.0.42 and later versions.

On 6/19/05, Tom Sayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe I am over-cautious but can you tell me what is incompatible in versions > prior to 2.0.42? Is it just the Third Party modules > issue? Is there anything else I need to consider because of the way Apache > was installed by Red Hat? There m

Re: [users@httpd] Windows, Apache and an ASP Module

On 6/19/05, Arthur Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is my first post to this mailing list so I hope I am not making a > mistake. > > I currently have a website written in ASP running on IIS; I am setting up > another system with php, apache and windows and would like to run the asp > site on

Re: [users@httpd] want index.cgi as directory default

On 6/19/05, Marty Landman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a virtual host set up and would like it to run > > http://yoyomaplayscello/EyesBehindTheBar/Spotter/index.cgi > > when requesting > > http://yoyomaplayscello/EyesBehindTheBar/Spotter/ > > I am able to run index.html by def

Re: [users@httpd] want index.cgi as directory default

You can simply use: DirectoryIndex index.cgi index.html in your Vhost configuration. На 19.6.2005 20:10 Marty Landman написа: > Hi, > > I've got a virtual host set up and would like it to run > > http://yoyomaplayscello/EyesBehindTheBar/Spotter/index.cgi > > when requesting > > http://yoyomaplays

[users@httpd] want index.cgi as directory default

Hi, I've got a virtual host set up and would like it to run http://yoyomaplayscello/EyesBehindTheBar/Spotter/index.cgi when requesting http://yoyomaplayscello/EyesBehindTheBar/Spotter/ I am able to run index.html by default from the directory, but after rem'g index.html and verifying that in

[users@httpd] Windows, Apache and an ASP Module

This is my first post to this mailing list so I hope I am not making a mistake. I currently have a website written in ASP running on IIS; I am setting up another system with php, apache and windows and would like to run the asp site on there as well. I have been looking for different ASP modules b

Re: [users@httpd] This release is compatible with modules compiled for 2.0.42 and later versions.

Thanks Andre I am not using third party modules, however, let me explain why I am concerned about simply installing the new version. My server has Redhat 9 and Apache was not installed in /usr/local/apache/ but in /etc/httpd/ . There is no sign of files that are often mentioned on installation

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

dtufs wrote: --- Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The 'add_httpd_block' script is something I wrote myself to drop the connection and block the IP for a while. But how do you block it? 403 is possible, but not what we want. Firewall is possible, but our hosting provider doesn't allows us

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

--- Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The 'add_httpd_block' script is something I wrote > myself to drop the connection and block the IP for > a while. But how do you block it? 403 is possible, but not what we want. Firewall is possible, but our hosting provider doesn't allows us to configure

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

Yes, I see where you're coming from... Actually, thinking further, you CAN set up mod_security so that it drops the connection - for example, I have this as a default action in my mod_security setup... SecFilterDefaultAction "deny,log,status:403,system:/usr/local/pft/add_httpd_block %s" Th

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

--- Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can configure mod_securiy so that it will not > respond at all - ie - > it will just leave the client hanging waiting for a > response (which it > will never get). Much like a 'silent' firewall. > > As I said, not ideal (the connection is still live),

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

Ah but !!! You can configure mod_securiy so that it will not respond at all - ie - it will just leave the client hanging waiting for a response (which it will never get). Much like a 'silent' firewall. As I said, not ideal (the connection is still live), but at least you can suppress any

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

> Once it you know this, you can configure it to > prevent further communication with the client > (not actually killing the connection, but the > affect will be the same - the client will give up). Unfortunately, the "client" will not give up. The result will be that our (very expensive) bandw

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

No, it won't let you kill the connection, but it probably WILL allow you to detect the conditions that would lead you to want to kill the connection. Once it you know this, you can configure it to prevent further communication with the client (not actually killing the connection, but the affect

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

--- Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you tried mod_security? - > http://www.modsecurity.org/ Thanks Rich. It certainly is an interesting module, however, it does not seem to be capable of closing a connection (it only supports the 'deny' action, which normally is just 403).

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

Have you tried mod_security? - http://www.modsecurity.org/ I've not tried to do anything like this before with it, but it might help. Worth a look... regards Rich. dtufs wrote: I'm not sure apache can do that but I have one linux box setup as firewall, patched with patch-o-matic and I do t

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

> I'm not sure apache can do that but I have one linux > box setup as firewall, > patched with patch-o-matic and I do this what you > want with iptables. Thanks for the reply. I'm not sure I understand it correctly, but this sounds like you are using the IP addresses as the basis for the ban. Ho

Re: [users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

I'm not sure apache can do that but I have one linux box setup as firewall, patched with patch-o-matic and I do this what you want with iptables. На 19.6.2005 12:20 dtufs написа: > We have been trying to cut down our bandwidth usage by > disallowing access for many spammers and malevolent > bots.

[users@httpd] How to close connection instead of sending 403?

We have been trying to cut down our bandwidth usage by disallowing access for many spammers and malevolent bots. We are currently doing it via .htaccess and respond with the "403 Forbidden" code. However, this still costs us some bandwidth. What we would like to do is close the connection without