Re: [cgiwrap-users] RE: cgi-wrap security issue

[Ian F. <ia...@mi...>]

Roger Haslock wrote:

> [ on the RaQ]
> I cannot see that changing system files will void the parts and labour bit,
> and I cannot see that the 30 days consulting will give any insight into the
> consequences of such changed files. If this is not correct, it would be nice
> to know where we stand.

I agree.

If the RaQ was sold as a webserver, with the implication that you could
do with it all that a normal Linux / Apache etc webserver will do, and
then you find that you have in fact to edit configurations manually,
then I think at least in the UK you'd have a reasonable case. What would
happen in a court case I've no idea, but I do think it would be a
reasonable customer-relations point.

In any case, if customer support means telling customers to reinstall to
factory default, without a means of resetting all the configurations and
websites from a backup, then how much is it worth anyway?

Regards,

Ian.