From: Jason H. <jc...@ey...> - 2001-09-10 17:42:15
|
Well, here is our company's current SSL virtual host setup. While it's not perfect, (it's actually cheap), it may need to be considered as a possible BC configuration concern. Say we host 10 sites on one server, all with their own vhost/docroot. For SSL, there is a vhost/docroot pointing to secure.domain.com/site_name. This allows us to secure multiple sites under one certification. So if the site is: http://www.site_name.com == /var/www/html/site_name the secured pages would be located at: https://secure.companyname.com/site_name == /var/www/html/secure/site_name Told ya it was cheap. :p jason Alex Black wrote: > > > I'll propose a potential concern here. i'm not sure how HTTPS/SSL is > > handled (site level vs. page level), but if the secure hostname/path > > differs from the non-secure hostname/path, make may need to know this at > > build time. > > The hostname couldn't be different (it's not the "virtual name" hostname is > single and unchangeaable...) but paths could definitely change, and that is > a good point. > > > For example: > > if only the checkout portion of a site is SSL enabled, and it's moved to > > a seperate docroot to keep visitors from viewing the rest of the site > > encrypted, one may want just the checkout.php to sit elsewhere > > > > > > http://mysite.com -> /var/www/html/mysite.com/ > > which has shop.php (categories.php, specials.php, etc etc) > > https://mysite.com -> /var/www/html/secure/mysite.com/ > > which only has checkout.php > > > > > This may be a bit too oddball for BC to support. _shrug_ > > But now that I think about it, what prevents you from having this tree?: > > user/site_name/htdocs/ > secure/ > base/ > > doing a make 'like normal' and just setting your virtualhosts accordingly? > > ... > > I'm trying to think of holes in that theory :) > > _a > > _______________________________________________ > binarycloud-dev mailing list > bin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/binarycloud-dev |