nicht angemeldet
Hi Christoph,
Stimmt es, dass diese Version auch im Web nach wie vor viel gebräuchlicher ist als 2.0?
Eine exakte Satistik ist mir nicht bekannt. Es scheint allerdings so, als ob die 1.3.x noch häufiger vorkommt, was nicht unbedingt verwundern muß. Der Apache wird schließlich auch auf "großen" Servern eingesetzt, und dort werden sich die Administratoren sehr genau überlegen, was sie auf ihren jeweiligen Testumgebungen erstmal durchspeilen und prüfen, und was sie dann tatsächlich einsetzen. Es gilt schließlich das Prinzip "never change a running system". Und wenn man ein paar tausend Benutrzerkonten zu verwalten hat, überlegt man sich schon ein paar Wochen, wann es sinnvoll ist, ein Update der grundlegenden Serversoftware vorzunehmen.
Apache on Windows Struggling?
One of the goals of Apache/2.0 was to better support operating systems other than Unix.
While the Windows version of Apache/1.3 was advertised as experimental, it was hoped
that in Apache/2.0 it would become much more widely established.
However, since the first general release of Apache/2.0 there have been a string of security
problems in the Windows (and other non-Unix) versions that may undermine confidence in the
suitability of Apache for these platforms.
Windows Apache entries listed at mitre.org's common vulnerabilities database include directory
traversal using dot-dot paths, revealing script source by appending invalid characters, and
DOS device names causing a denial-of-service. The striking thing is that these are sterotypical
vulnerabilities that over the years many other products have suffered from, and fixed.
Apache developers will be disappointed that they were not able to learn from other people's
mistakes sufficiently well to pre-empt the same vulnerabilities appearing in their own server.
Notwithstanding the security problems, the support for threading in Apache/2.0 is a major
performance breakthrough for the Windows version and consquently sites using Apache on Windows
have a bigger incentive to upgrade to version 2 than sites on Unix.
This is reflected in the relative uptake of Apache/2.0: a little over 1% of all Apache sites
are running version 2, but amongst Windows servers the proportion is over 7%.
(http://www.netcraft.com/survey/)
Viele Grüße
Michael
T'Pol: I apologize if I acted inappropriately.
V'Lar: Not at all. In fact, your bluntness made me reconsider some of my positions. Much as it has now.
(sh:| fo:} ch:] rl:( br:^ n4:( ie:% mo:) va:| de:/ zu:| fl:( ss:) ls:~ js:|)