Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-docs-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 44455 invoked by uid 500); 13 Nov 2002 22:15:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact docs-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: docs@httpd.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list docs@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 44444 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2002 22:15:44 -0000 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Malo Subject: Re: [Review] mod_dav.xml split (Revision) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: TIMTOWTDI References: Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 23:13:29 +0100 To: docs@httpd.apache.org Message-ID: User-Agent: Yes! X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N * Joshua Slive wrote: > The DavLockDB is written as the httpd User/Group, correct? yep. (resp. the process uid/gid, think of perchild) > Is it safe to > write it to a publicly writable directory like /tmp? hmm. I think no. > If so, we should > change the example in the DavLockDB directivesynopsis to recommend that, > since it now points to logs/DavLock. If not, we should change the other > examples to logs/DavLock, and we should document the necessity to > touch/chown the file before starting apache. The problem is: "normal" logfiles are usually opened as root, so in fact *nobody* needs write access to the logs directory. Actually one should create a separate directory for runtime lo[g|ck]s, like DavLock, RewriteLog, ScriptLog (?). Or is this too paranoid? (of course, this doesn't affect the win32 'user concept'...) nd -- s s^saaaaaoaaaoaaaaooooaaoaaaomaaaa a alataa aaoat a a a maoaa a laoata a oia a o a m a o alaoooat aaool aaoaa matooololaaatoto aaa o a o ms;s;\s;s;g;y;s;:;s;y#mailto: # \51/\134\137| http://www.perlig.de #;print;# > nd@perlig.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org