[thelist] PWS dilemma

.jeff jeff at members.evolt.org
Tue Dec 11 14:00:12 CST 2001


burhan,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Burhan Khalid
>
> Also, PWS has a (I think) limit of 5 simultaneous
> connections (people more familiar with PWS, please
> correct me as appropriate). There could be a situation
> that your client's site is down because the sixth
> person is trying to connect when there are five more
> online (or the server hasn't timedout an idle
> connection).
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

actually, it's worse than you think.  if browsers only made one connection
at a time then pws could support more than one user.  however, browsers make
multiple connections.  using pws, i've seen image heavy pages tie up all the
available connections resulting in some elements never being downloaded.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> Of course, with WinME, you can pretty much throw
> security out the window.  (See a trend here?). If your
> client is serious about security, and her bottom line,
> then I think she would be well advised to invest in
> either :
>
> (A) Unix/Solarix/Linux Box (if onsite)
> (B) Reliable Host (offsite)
>
> (A) Apache (if onsite)
> (B) Easy access to secure features (offsite)
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

iis would be a good choice in this as well, especially if nt sysadmins are
more readily available to her than unix sysadmins.  the security of the
system is only as good as your sysadmin.

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/






More information about the thelist mailing list