From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FpcBh-0000Nx-6f for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 02:29:57 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k5C2SNEY019404; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 02:28:23 GMT Received: from mailout2.igs.net (mailout2.igs.net [216.58.97.88]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5C2NQ5j024928 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 02:23:27 GMT Received: from waltdnes.org (i216-58-42-200.cybersurf.com [216.58.42.200]) by mailout2.igs.net (Postfix) with SMTP id F2FB347EA06 for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:23:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:24:05 -0400 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:24:05 -0400 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] An alternative to http-replicator Message-ID: <20060612022405.GB28110@waltdnes.org> References: <20060610033154.GA22420@waltdnes.org> <448A6201.6090900@cs.umn.edu> <20060611024303.GA26116@waltdnes.org> <358eca8f0606110118g63c06eden5c29fedac7e06859@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <358eca8f0606110118g63c06eden5c29fedac7e06859@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: b1e8eb64-04d2-4e8a-b959-d637837f0164 X-Archives-Hash: ee181ba075a4670c0929770ecefd6ed0 On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 08:18:11AM +0000, Mick wrote > How does boa compares with http-replicator in terms of > functionality/security? boa is a lean+mean+fast webserver. See http://www.boa.org for details. > PS. Other than not running portmapper is there a way of securing it? It has to be accessed by all machines that want to nfs-mount on the server, so they can ask it what port nfs is running on. Restrict access to only the clients that need to nfs-mount on the server. The usual method is iptables. For "defense in depth", you can also use inet.d and hosts.allow/hosts.deny. I'm not an nfs expert. Is it possible to force nfs to a specific port on both the client and server such that they'll talk without handshaking via portmapper first? -- Walter Dnes In linux /sbin/init is Job #1 My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list