cgiwrap-users

Re: [cgiwrap-users] AddHandler

[Ralph H. <rj...@mo...>]

> Has anyone figured out how to use Apache's AddHandler function to get
> cgiwrap to work ...
> 
> AddHandler cgi-wrapper .cgi
> Action cgi-wrapper /virtual-path-to-wrapper/username
> 
> Doesn't work.

Are you saying this construct works with GET method but not POST method?
Does POST method work without AddHandler?

[cgiwrap-users] POST method (was AddHandler)

[Ralph H. <rj...@mo...>]

> its just that if you a form with the POST method, STDIN is empty and
> therefore doesn't transfer and variables.

I do not see this behavior at all. We provide a cgiwrap'd dir for hosted
sites. Many of them (ourselves included) use the POST method in scripts
with no problems. I can't help but think your observed phenomenon has some
other cause.

RE: [cgiwrap-users] AddHandler

[Andy A. <an...@4w...>]

Server Version: Apache/1.3.19 (Unix) (Red-Hat/Linux) mod_ssl/2.8.1
OpenSSL/0.9.6 PHP/4.0.4pl1 mod_perl/1.21 FrontPage/4.0.4.3

This is the first and only version i've tried to install it on. I am using
CGIWRAP-3.6.

Yes.. cgi's work fine without the wrapper.. and also work fine _with_ the
wrapper.. its just that if you a form with the POST method, STDIN is empty
and therefore doesn't transfer and variables.

I have verified this with one other person too.

-Andy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Piotr Klaban [mailto:ma...@ma...]
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 4:16 AM
> To: Andy Angrick
> Subject: Re: [cgiwrap-users] AddHandler
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 11:12:08PM -0500, Andy Angrick wrote:
> > AddHandler cgi-wrapper .cgi
> > Action cgi-wrapper /virtual-path-to-wrapper/username
> >
> > Doesn't work.
>
> What version of Apache you are using. Did it work with
> previous version? What version of cgiwrap you have?
> Does cgi-script work ok?
>
> --
> Piotr Klaban
>

[cgiwrap-users] AddHandler

[Andy A. <an...@4w...>]

Has anyone figured out how to use Apache's AddHandler function to get
cgiwrap to work with forms that have the POST method. It seems that it
doesn't work with the newer versions of apache (or at least my version
and/or combination of modules loaded). GET method works fine.. with a POST
method, STDIN is blank and therefore doesn't pass any variables.

AddHandler cgi-wrapper .cgi
Action cgi-wrapper /virtual-path-to-wrapper/username

Doesn't work.

Any suggestions?

Thanks
Andy Angrick
CGIScript.net
p.s. I was using cgiwrap-3.6

[cgiwrap-users] Base CGI dir problem

[<ce...@sm...>]

Hi,

   I have been using CGIWRAP for a while and I really like it, 
although I
have a serious problem now. In each of my apache Virtual Hosts, I 
have the
folloing directive:

Action cgi-wrapper /cgisys/cgiwrap/username

And I set cgi-wrapper as an handler for CGI files. This works 
perfectly
when I have only 1 Virtual Hosts per system users. I set --with-cgi-
dir to
public_html, and everything's alright. Although, now I have some users
hosting multiple domain in the same public_html dir like:
/user/public_html/domain1.com/
/user/public_html/domain2.com/
/user/public_html/domain3.com/

So if I have a script in /user/public_html/domain1.com/script.pl, 
CGIWRAP
searches for the script in /user/public_html/script.pl.

As a temporary workaround, I place the script in both locations, but 
I have
to find a fix for this.

I noticed the --with-rewrite-file option, although no documentation 
about
it is available... I looked at the sources and it doesn't seem to do 
what I
want, I would need this kind of file to override the static --with-
cgi-dir.

What can I do?


Thank you,

Cedric Veilleux

Re: [cgiwrap-users] RedHat upgrade

[Nathan N. <nn...@um...>]

When you say "cgi still doesn't run" could you be more specific? Is
/usr/local/apache/cgi-bin configured as a cgi directory in httpd.conf?
(i.e. w/ a ScriptAlias)

Just as a note - you really don't need both cgiwrap and suexec. They
both serve similar purposes. 

If you're getting an error when trying to run cgi, what is the error?

-- Nathan

geh...@mi... wrote:
> 
> I'm a student system administrator for two linux boxes at a small state
> university. I've just started the job and I have to get cgi working
> again. What happened is that we have a "professional" doing security. He
> upgraded Red Hat from 6.2 to 7.0. He never tested if all the major
> services were still working. Since no class was using cgi at the time,
> no one complained. Now I have the job and I have to fix it. His answer
> is "just turn suExec on".  Well, I'd like to get cgiwrap working before
> I do that.
> 
> After much time staring at the screen reading apache manuals, I
> discovered that Apache 1.3? installs into a new directory and erases the
> contents of the old directory. I then discovered, that cgiwrap was not
> installed in the cgi-bin directory of the new Apache (the professional's
> excuse was that it wasn't a rpm file so of course it wouldn't upgrade).
> Anyway, I added the new directory to configure, did Make and then Make
> Install. So far so good, inspection shows that cgiwrap and other
> programs are in /usr/local/apache/cgi-bin. Good, except cgi still
> doesn't run. Anyone have any suggestions?  Oh, yeh since the RH 7.0 was
> an upgrade, not a new install, the original cgiwrap download was still
> present. No changes to configure were made except for changing the
> Apache install directory.  As far as anyone can tell, cgiwrap was
> working up until the upgrade.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cgiwrap-users mailing list
> cgi...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cgiwrap-users

-- 


------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nn...@um...
University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-4841
CIS - Systems Programming                Fax: (573) 341-4216

[cgiwrap-users] RedHat upgrade

[<geh...@mi...>]

I'm a student system administrator for two linux boxes at a small state
university. I've just started the job and I have to get cgi working
again. What happened is that we have a "professional" doing security. He
upgraded Red Hat from 6.2 to 7.0. He never tested if all the major
services were still working. Since no class was using cgi at the time,
no one complained. Now I have the job and I have to fix it. His answer
is "just turn suExec on".  Well, I'd like to get cgiwrap working before
I do that.

After much time staring at the screen reading apache manuals, I
discovered that Apache 1.3? installs into a new directory and erases the
contents of the old directory. I then discovered, that cgiwrap was not
installed in the cgi-bin directory of the new Apache (the professional's
excuse was that it wasn't a rpm file so of course it wouldn't upgrade).
Anyway, I added the new directory to configure, did Make and then Make
Install. So far so good, inspection shows that cgiwrap and other
programs are in /usr/local/apache/cgi-bin. Good, except cgi still
doesn't run. Anyone have any suggestions?  Oh, yeh since the RH 7.0 was
an upgrade, not a new install, the original cgiwrap download was still
present. No changes to configure were made except for changing the
Apache install directory.  As far as anyone can tell, cgiwrap was
working up until the upgrade.

[cgiwrap-users] rewrite-file | getting UID from file, not from path

[blinky <bl...@gm...>]

hi.

can somebody tell me please that the rewrite-file is for and what the form=
at is?

is there a way to get the UID the script should run under (with? ;) from t=
he owner-ID of the file it executes?
i think that this are just about 2 lines or so... but i can't C - please h=
elp :)

thanks!

cheers,

daniel

RE: [cgiwrap-users] --without-redirect-stderr

[Neulinger, N. <nn...@um...>]

you can't. It's a legitimate error message - you're trying to execute a
script for a user that doesn't exist. If you are concerned about that, edit
the source.

-- Nathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark [mailto:mr...@gd...]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 11:39 AM
> To: cgi...@li...
> Subject: [cgiwrap-users] --without-redirect-stderr
> 
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> I was hoping setting the config option "--without-redirect-stderr" 
> would stop the following error from being displayed to the client: 
> 
> CGIWrap Error: User not found
> CGIWrap was unable to find the user 'sdfsdf' in the password 
> file on this server. 
> Check the URL and try again. 
> .... etc
> 
> How can I catch this error and stop it from displaying all the other
> stuff
> with this error message.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
>         Mark
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cgiwrap-users mailing list
> cgi...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cgiwrap-users
> 

[cgiwrap-users] --without-redirect-stderr

[Mark <mr...@gd...>]

Hi, 

I was hoping setting the config option "--without-redirect-stderr" 
would stop the following error from being displayed to the client: 

CGIWrap Error: User not found
CGIWrap was unable to find the user 'sdfsdf' in the password 
file on this server. 
Check the URL and try again. 
.... etc

How can I catch this error and stop it from displaying all the other
stuff
with this error message.

Thanks in advance.

        Mark

[cgiwrap-users] RE: CGIwrap...

[Neulinger, N. <nn...@um...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Js...@ao... [mailto:Js...@ao...]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 8:11 AM
> To: nn...@um...
> Subject: Re: CGIwrap...
> 
> 
> Nathan,
> Thanks for your reply.  I've already tried both of your suggestions 
> yesterday...  
> 
> 1. Read the error message, 
> 2. and fixed the permissions... (permissions are set properly 
> to chmod 777).  
> Also moved the script out of a user folder, into public html 
> and a few other 
> locations... and still returns the same CGIwrap error.

Exactly - what on earth would you make a cgi script WORLD WRITABLE for? Who
told you to set the permissions of the script to 777? If that's what the
script writer said to do, they are an idiot and have no concern whatsoever
for security. At the ABSOLUTE most you'd want it to be 755. (world
execute+read, owner write) 

I strongly suggest that unless you want your box hacked big time, you read
up on security.

> Are there any guides that exist regarding CGIwrap error 
> messages?  I didn't 
> see anything regarding 'group writable' script errors... and 
> this CGI works 
> fine on other UNIX OS machines that I'm running.  
> 
> I'm sure that this is quite basic for you (since your wrote 
> CGIwrap...) - 
> unfortunately, this is my first experience with CGIwrap... 
> thanks again for 
> your reply.

> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Joe Small
> 

[cgiwrap-users] Premature end of script headers: /usr/cgiwrap/cgiwrap

[Steve W. <ste...@be...>]

I am trying to install majorcool on a Cobalt RaQ4 (running a modified RedHat
6x).  Following the same instructions I'm able to install and run it on
other RedHat servers running cgiwrap, but this box is giving me problems.
When I call the script for majorcool from the web I get an internal error
and /var/log/httpd/error contains the line "Premature end of script headers:
/usr/cgiwrap/cgiwrap".

I've checked permissions, read through a ton of messages about the error
above and have studied the script but I'm stumped.  Any help would be
appreciated, even if it's just ruling out a potential area to investigate -
I don't know if it's the script, cgiwrap, Apache or something else.

--
Steve Werby
President, Befriend Internet Services LLC
http://www.befriend.com/

Re: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP

[Piotr K. <ma...@ma...>]

On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 01:28:00PM -0500, Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
> > That's also what I thought. Other people have got PHP running with 
> > CGIWrap (although I have not seen evidence that PHP4.0.5 runs 
> > with it). I 

Try using cgiwrap downloaded from the CVS:
cvs -d:pserver:ano...@cv...:/cvsroot/cgiwrap login
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:ano...@cv...:/cvsroot/cgiwrap co cgiwrap

use empty password (some time ago it was also 'anonymous').

> > actually wanted to try the patch for avoiding the #!-line I 
> > got some time 
> > ago from the cgiwrap-mailing-list. But one step after the other.
The patch for cvs is at http://w3.man.torun.pl/~makler/patches/cgiwrap/

> > So you have no idea what I can try now?
There is new variable SCRIPT_FILENAME necessary with new php version.
You can check if it would work with newer cgiwrap (from cvs).

cgiwrap 3.6.4 do not work with php at all because it lacks
the new variable necessary for php - SCRIPT_FILENAME.
Alternatively you can try to compile php without --enable-discard-path
but it is not recomended.

Regards,

-- 
Piotr Klaban

Re: [cgiwrap-users] Max user processes

[Nathan N. <nn...@um...>]

Depending on the O/S - some resources limits are not checked when a
setuid() is done. That's what happens with cgiwrap. Although if cgiwrap
is configured to use system() to execute the script, it should be
limited at that time, although I am not positive. When cgiwrap is
configured to use execv(), then I can see why it might not take effect.

-- Nathan

Tuc wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>         Perplexing question.  Normally, the question "Whats the max number
> of processes I can have as a user" would command the answer "ulimit -a"
> (And on an untainted 4.0.1/4.2 system with a user which isn't in any of the
> default groups it ends up being "max user processes          64").
> 
>         HOWEVER.......What about if its started out of Apache?  Now, the
> typical answer is "Um, whatever the User/Group set in Apache is".  Heres where
> it starts to get interesting.
> 
>         We run a wrapper called "CGIWRAP". (http://cgiwrap.sourceforge.net/)
> The cgiwrap wrapper is suid root, but then runs the CGI with the permissions
> of the user who owns the script.
> 
>         At one point, the user ran over 512 copies of a CGI, but when they
> attempted to log in, they continously got "bash: fork: Resource temporarily
> unavailable". Until we killed them the user couldn't do anything when they
> logged on.
> 
>         Any ideas why they were able to get 512 running, when max uproc is
> 64?
> 
>                 Thanks, Tuc/TTSG Internet Services, Inc.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cgiwrap-users mailing list
> cgi...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cgiwrap-users

-- 


------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nn...@um...
University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-4841
CIS - Systems Programming                Fax: (573) 341-4216

[cgiwrap-users] Max user processes

[Tuc <tu...@tt...>]

Hi,

	Perplexing question.  Normally, the question "Whats the max number
of processes I can have as a user" would command the answer "ulimit -a"
(And on an untainted 4.0.1/4.2 system with a user which isn't in any of the
default groups it ends up being "max user processes          64").

	HOWEVER.......What about if its started out of Apache?  Now, the
typical answer is "Um, whatever the User/Group set in Apache is".  Heres where
it starts to get interesting.

	We run a wrapper called "CGIWRAP". (http://cgiwrap.sourceforge.net/)
The cgiwrap wrapper is suid root, but then runs the CGI with the permissions
of the user who owns the script.

	At one point, the user ran over 512 copies of a CGI, but when they
attempted to log in, they continously got "bash: fork: Resource temporarily 
unavailable". Until we killed them the user couldn't do anything when they
logged on.

	Any ideas why they were able to get 512 running, when max uproc is
64?

		Thanks, Tuc/TTSG Internet Services, Inc.

RE: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP

[Neulinger, N. <nn...@um...>]

How are you trying to run it?

Try the standard URL:

http://host/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/userid/myscript.php

and make sure myscript.php has the appropriate #! line. 

If that works, then track the problem from there.

-- Nathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Middleton 
> [mailto:mic...@rz...]
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 1:09 PM
> To: Neulinger, Nathan
> Subject: RE: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP
> 
> 
> 
> Hallo Nathan,
> 
> Thanks for the very prompt reply.
> 
> 
> On 25 May 2001, at 12:58, Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
> 
> > Looks to me like the cgiwrap binary itself is being used as 
> input to the
> > PHP processor perhaps? Not sure, but that's definately 
> portions of the
> > cgiwrap binary in the output you sent.
> > 
> > I don't have a PHP install handy, and have never used it, 
> so really can't
> > tell ya much more than that.
> > 
> > -- Nathan
> > 
> 
> That's also what I thought. Other people have got PHP running with 
> CGIWrap (although I have not seen evidence that PHP4.0.5 runs 
> with it). I 
> actually wanted to try the patch for avoiding the #!-line I 
> got some time 
> ago from the cgiwrap-mailing-list. But one step after the other.
> 
> So you have no idea what I can try now?
> 
> Mike
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Michael Middleton               
> RZ der Universitaet Regensburg
> 93040 REGENSBURG            Tel: +49-941/943-4890
> F R Germany
> 

RE: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP

[Neulinger, N. <nn...@um...>]

Looks to me like the cgiwrap binary itself is being used as input to the PHP
processor perhaps? Not sure, but that's definately portions of the cgiwrap
binary in the output you sent.

I don't have a PHP install handy, and have never used it, so really can't
tell ya much more than that.

-- Nathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Middleton 
> [mailto:mic...@rz...]
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 12:53 PM
> To: cgi...@li...
> Subject: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP
> 
> 
> I have been using CGIWrap and PHP in "safe mode" as an Apache DSO for 
> some time. Everthing works fine. Now I have tried to get PHP 
> running as 
> CGI under CGIWrap. CGIWrap runs fine with a simple Perl 
> script. A simple 
> PHP script:
> 
> #!/www-cgi/local/bin/php
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
>  <TITLE>Test</TITLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY>
> <P>
> test <?php echo "it\n"; ?>
> </BODY></HTML>
> 
> produces the correct output when called directly or as a CGI (without 
> wrapper):
> 
> X-Powered-By: PHP/4.0.5
> Content-type: text/html
> 
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
>  <TITLE>Test</TITLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY>
> <P>
> test it
> </BODY></HTML>
> 
> When I start it through CGIWrap the Headers come out all 
> right, but the 
> rest is garbled binary data (see attachment). I tried it also with 
> cgiwrapd, which confirmed that PHP was being started and that 
> the headers 
> were produced correctly. I cannot see anything wrong in the logs.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?
> 
> Yours
> Mike Middleton
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Michael Middleton               
> RZ der Universitaet Regensburg
> 93040 REGENSBURG            Tel: +49-941/943-4890
> F R Germany
> 

[cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap and PHP

[Michael M. <mic...@rz...>]

I have been using CGIWrap and PHP in "safe mode" as an Apache DSO for 
some time. Everthing works fine. Now I have tried to get PHP running as 
CGI under CGIWrap. CGIWrap runs fine with a simple Perl script. A simple 
PHP script:

#!/www-cgi/local/bin/php
<HTML>
<HEAD>
 <TITLE>Test</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P>
test <?php echo "it\n"; ?>
</BODY></HTML>

produces the correct output when called directly or as a CGI (without 
wrapper):

X-Powered-By: PHP/4.0.5
Content-type: text/html

<HTML>
<HEAD>
 <TITLE>Test</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P>
test it
</BODY></HTML>

When I start it through CGIWrap the Headers come out all right, but the 
rest is garbled binary data (see attachment). I tried it also with 
cgiwrapd, which confirmed that PHP was being started and that the headers 
were produced correctly. I cannot see anything wrong in the logs.

What am I doing wrong?

Yours
Mike Middleton

-------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Middleton               
RZ der Universitaet Regensburg
93040 REGENSBURG            Tel: +49-941/943-4890
F R Germany

Re: [cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap Error

[Steve W. <ste...@be...>]

"Adrian Parker" <ad...@on...> wrote:
> I'm running on a Cobalt Linux machine which runs CGIWrap
> and Perl 5.005_3.  I've just installed Neomail 1.24.  When
> trying to run the neomail.pl file the following is returned:
>
> "CGIWrap Error:  Execution of this script not permitted
> Execution of (root) is not permitted for the following reason:
> User not Privileged."

That means the script is owned by user "root".  On the Cobalt systems their
implementation of CGIWrap only allows CGI scripts to be run by valid users
for the particular site.  This means that users such as admin, root, httpd
and nobody cannot own the script.  This is implemented for security
purposes.  CGIWrap can be disabled for the site by changing Apache
directives for it.  Search the Cobalt User list archives at
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cobalt-users for "cgiwrap" and you should
find some posts with directions.

--
Steve Werby
President, Befriend Internet Services LLC
http://www.befriend.com/

[cgiwrap-users] CGIWrap Error

[Adrian P. <ad...@on...>]

I'm running on a Cobalt Linux machine which runs CGIWrap and Perl =
5.005_3.  I've just installed Neomail 1.24.  When trying to run the =
neomail.pl file the following is returned:

"CGIWrap Error:  Execution of this script not permitted
Execution of (root) is not permitted for the following reason:
User not Privileged."

Neomail.pl calls root read and write files online (like /etc/shadow).  =
It almost looks to me like CGIWrap is not affecting files in the =
directory.  Yet I'm assured by the admin all personal cgi-bins are =
CGIWrap enabled.

Is there any circumstance under which CGIWrap will not run a script with =
it's owner's permissions?  At present the file is owned by root in group =
neomail.  If I setuid to the scripts it calls, which are not in the =
cgi-bin, then it seems to somewhat work.  Though it never properly reads =
from the password file (I believe).


<Ade
Adrian Parker <mailto:ad...@on...>

[cgiwrap-users] RE: [PHP] hosting "closed" web application for multiple users

[Steven H. <st...@ha...>]

Actually, We _are_ considering of buying Zend Encoder, but in the
middle of thinking for alternatives... :-)

However, sometimes vendors do not want user to have access to
the _binary also_ (and then run it somewhere else), so that needs
some extra protection other than the Encoder too.

Regards,
Steve

At 19/05/2001 21:47, Craig Vincent wrote:
><snip>
>2) user cannot trick other root processes to read
>script.php for her.
>
>Is there a better alternative?
></snip>
>
>Depending on your budget yes there is.  Zend has a PHP encoding utility
>which performs two functions, first off since it needs to run through their
>optimizer your PHP scripts will tend to run faster (at the expense of a bit
>more memory consumption) and also you don't need to worry about preventing
>the source code from being read as the php scripts are converted into a
>binary executable.  License to use these programs are I believe around $600
>per year but offer a wide range of additional features but I would consider
>it well worth it to a company rather than spending countless tech hours and
>security testing to prevent the source from being viewed.
>
>http://www.zend.com
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Craig Vincent

[cgiwrap-users] hosting "closed" web application for multiple users

[Steven H. <st...@ha...>]

I have a requirement like this:

- the php script should be runnable by httpd user only.
- the php script will include other files.
- the php script should run as the user.
- the user must not be able to access the source code
   of the scripts.

What I can think of so far:

Put the script in a directory only accessible by the
httpd user (www), e.g.:

  # mkdir -p /home/app
  # cp script.php /home/app
  # chown root.www /home/app
  # chmod 550 /home/app
  # chown root.root /home/app/script.php
  # chmod 555 /home/app/script.php

So script.php is safe from the user (except when somehow
the user manages to get its current directory changed to
/home/app, where then she can take script.php easily).

To prevent the user getting her hands to the script.php
via www user, I set the Apache configuration:

  Options SymLinksIfOwnerMatch

to prevent the user linking to /home/app or
/home/app/script.php (unless the user can trick www or
some other privileged user to create the link for her).

and makes sure that Apache only runs wrapped CGI scripts,
and php runs as a cgi binary and not server module.

Now I just need to make sure that:

1) user cannot trick script.php to read and display itself
out to the browser, or copy itself to some public
directory.

2) user cannot trick other root processes to read
script.php for her.

Is there a better alternative?

Regards,
Steve 

[cgiwrap-users] Bizarre Post Method

[Andy A. <an...@4w...>]

Hi,

I just installed cgiwrap on my server for a few virtual hosts and i thought
all was going well.. scripts appeared to work and they were running under
the specified user id. I just realized that all is not well.. For some
reason, any form with a POST method does not transfer the form variables,
however, GET method works. Has anyone experienced anything like this or know
how i can fix it? I'm using apache's AddHandler directive to run the perl
scripts through cgiwrap. I discovered this while i was was working on a
form.. i thought i was going mad.. none of the form variables where being
submitted. I uploaded the same file on another server without cgiwrap and it
worked as expected. I then tried a few scripts that i knew worked before i
installed cgiwrap and nothing gets submitted with forms that have the POST
method.

Thanks,
Andy Angrick

[cgiwrap-users] Apache / mod_vhost_alias /CGI-Wrap = Trouble ?

[Michael G. <ge...@al...>]

Hi List,

I have a problem here with the vhost_alias-module and cgiwrap. It seems that PATH-INFO is wrong on every second click. E.G. A Script that should link to 

www.my_domain.com/cgi-bin/test.pl 

is rewritten to 

www.my_domain.com/cgi-bin/my_domain/test.pl 

- where cgi-bin/my_domain  is a non-existent directory...

 Excerpt from httpd.conf:
 
<VirtualHost 192.168.100.109:80>
UseCanonicalName off
VirtualDocumentRoot /var/www/%-1/%-2/www
VirtualScriptAlias /var/www/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/cgiwrap/%-2/
#VirtualScriptAlias /var/www/%-1/%-2/cgi-bin/
CustomLog /var/log/httpd/virt.log "%V %h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\""
AddHandler cgi-wrapper .cgi
AddHandler cgi-wrapper .pl
</VirtualHost>
 
Anyone recognizing a bug here ? Are there known issues with vhost-support and cgiwrap in general ?
 
 Thanks in advance,
Mike

[cgiwrap-users] .htaccess

[Ralph H. <rj...@mo...>]

I'm having no success getting .htaccess to work in a cgiwrap'd directory.
Is cgiwrap possibly incompatible with apache's .htaccess mechanism or
should I look for some other cause?

Thanks in advance.	- Ralph