[Wolves] Couple of Konqueror q's

[David Goodwin]

>
> with nobody logged in on webserver, this from ssh'ing from another box.
> As you see , one root, rest apache - good or bad?
>


That's normal. In the 2.2 kernel it was necessary to keep a root user
which had the right to bind to a port < 1024, and all requests were passed
on to newly spawned processes with a limited permissions (i.e. different
user).

I don't think kernel 2.4 or 2.6 require the root user, so it's probably a
legacy thing.
I may of course be talking b0ll0cks.


> So apache should not have write access to the web directory, but should
> be 'owner'and have read access?

If it was the owner it would be able to get write access! Read (and
perhaps execute) are all apache requires, on the "other" permissions.


David.
-- 

http://codepoets.co.uk/david