On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 01:36:36PM -0800, Mike Orr wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 03:28:57PM -0500, Edmund Lian wrote:
> > Hmmm... I think that in general, I don't understand the differences between
> > ExtensionsToServer, ExtensionsToIgnore, FilesToServe and FilesToHide...
> It's more a case of earlier criteria being inadequate so later ones were
> added, but the old keywords remain for backward compatibility.
In particular, it used to only be ExtensionsToIgnore. That caused
problems when ppl didn't realize all the backup extensions that might
If security is paramount, the *Serve options are safer. The only
disadvantage is that you must list all your "other" extensions
(.png, .ram, .txt, whatever Shockwave's is, etc), and if you or your
user adds another multimedia type, you have to remember to update the
option. I think that's better than accidentally allowing ~, .bak,
etc to leak through, but if you're running a multiuser site and want
to give your users flexibility in setting up there web sites, it may
not be practical.
-Mike (Iron) Orr, iron@... (if mail problems: mso@...)
http://iron.cx/ English * Esperanto * Russkiy * Deutsch * Espan~ol