RE: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
Aside from being an interesting fact, how does this affect us? I mean, as mod_perl developers? I can't imagine that mod_perl will ever be the major scripting language since it, by nature, is unrestrictive. On a multi-user/multi-host server, I think I'd rather PHP be run than mod_perl, simply because I don't want sites stepping on each other's toes and have to worry about restarting httpd. I don't know. I don't see it overtaking less-powerful (more restrictive) languages, at least in numbers. Now, if these numbers are generated by looking at high-profile websites, then I'll buy the importance of the percentages. Regardless, thanks for the report. It was cool to see just how many servers have good admin's behind them :)
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
From: Ilya Martynov [EMAIL PROTECTED] IM (frankly Safe.pm is a joke). Now this thread has taken my interest. Ilya, would you care to expound on this statement? I'm planning to use Safe in production soon. --- Rodney Broom President, R.Broom Consulting http://www.rbroom.com/
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
Mark Coffman wrote: I can't imagine that mod_perl will ever be the major scripting language since it, by nature, is unrestrictive. On a multi-user/multi-host server, I think I'd rather PHP be run than mod_perl, simply because I don't want sites stepping on each other's toes and have to worry about restarting httpd. Isn't PHP just as dangerous as mod_perl when run in the server process (as opposed to CGI mode) on a multi-user virtual host server? - Perrin
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:14:32 -0400, Perrin Harkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: PH Mark Coffman wrote: I can't imagine that mod_perl will ever be the major scripting language since it, by nature, is unrestrictive. On a multi-user/multi-host server, I think I'd rather PHP be run than mod_perl, simply because I don't want sites stepping on each other's toes and have to worry about restarting httpd. PH Isn't PHP just as dangerous as mod_perl when run in the server process PH (as opposed to CGI mode) on a multi-user virtual host server? As I understand PHP have better support for sandboxing than Perl (frankly Safe.pm is a joke). -- Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:53:50 -0700, Rodney Broom [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: RB From: Ilya Martynov [EMAIL PROTECTED] IM (frankly Safe.pm is a joke). RB Now this thread has taken my interest. Ilya, would you care to RB expound on this statement? I'm planning to use Safe in production RB soon. Try to implement something that works with database and files inside of Safe compartment. Either you will have to allow too much or your code will not work because of restrictions. Somewhat related reading: http://www.perlmonks.com/index.pl?node_id=166096 -- Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
From: Ilya Martynov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Try to implement something that works with database and files inside of Safe compartment. Ah, yes. I can definately see that. --- Rodney Broom President, R.Broom Consulting http://www.rbroom.com/
mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
hi all... just FYI... mod_perl use seems to be dramatically on the rise again. here'are the statistics for August from security space: perl august: %36.83 july: %30.79 change: %19.64 PHP august: %38.59 july: %40.03 change: %-3.62 https://secure1.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200208/apachemods.html --Geoff
Re: mod_perl statistics on securityspace.com
hi all... just FYI... mod_perl use seems to be dramatically on the rise again. here'are the statistics for August from security space: perl august: %36.83 july: %30.79 change: %19.64 PHP august: %38.59 july: %40.03 change: %-3.62 https://secure1.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200208/apachemods.html --Geoff Check the month before, I believe this is at least the second month in a row this trend has occured. I'm happy someone noticed. -Chris
