Billy

I think most of us are looking forward to PHP5 not because it will be "safer," mind you, but because many new functions have been added, including but not limited to str_ireplace(), str_split(), and file_put_contents(). Also, many things have been overhauled, like object handling and XML parsing. On the other hand, it would be fabulous to find out that it is more secure, but that remains to be seen. Probably like you, I am cautiously optimistic.

Dear Raul - Thanks for the advice - I will take it seriously. I've heard the same thing from lots of other experts, too! Thanks, Billy

Yeah, having 31,000 -ish support tickets all at once would probably suck On a related note, I read that in PHP5, registered globals are off by default. If TCH upgrades, will register globals be set to "off?" That's probably going to be the biggest issue with most people - having to change $varaible to $_REQUEST[variable] in every form script.

I have a simple PHP security question: If magic_quotes_gpc is enabled, is it really necessary to use mysql_real_escape_string() ? It would seem kind of redundant. Thanks!

Dear Mike: Thanks for your help, too. The host I am ftp-ing the file to is my own host, the same host that is being backed up. As I stated before, I don't have the ability to modify permissions on my own home directory. Does this mean I need to have the file put into a directory lower down on the tree? And thanks for writing this cool script, anyways! Billy

Lisa - Thanks for your help. The cPanel script is saving to my home directory, which I don't have the ability to modify permissions on! Any other ideas? Thanks again

I have fullbackup.php set up as a daily cron job on a couple of my TCH-hosted sites, just in case I do something stupid - which happens on a fairly regular basis It has been working great for, say, the past 6 months or so, creating a full backup everyday for both sites, and sending me a little email to let me know. Today, after I screwed a file up on one of my sites, I went to download one of these archives to extract a backup copy of that file - only to find that there hasn't been one made for the past three days. Even though the script has been sending me emails for the past 3 days, they contained an error message that I did not detect until today. Here's a copy of the email from today: backup_error.html This archive, backup-10.13.2004....tar.gz, did not make it to my home directory - and it seems this has been happening since 10-11-2004. After submitting a ticket with help desk, I was told that they don't help with development issues. Help?

I've always wanted a good text editor with integrated FTP for Mac, but there doesn't seem to be anything like that besides BBEdit, which, in my opinion, is horribly buggy. HTML-kit for PC's has superbly integrated ftp capabilities, and it's free. Mac: BBEdit (boo) PC: HTML-kit

Will TCH give us a heads-up before the (eventual) upgrade on our particular server? Thanks, Billy

I'm getting a 403:Forbidden error when I try to access a subdomain via http on one of my sites. Funny thing is that I never set any restrictions, via .htaccess or any other way. I checked the .htaccess files to make sure, and I used cPanel to make sure that web protect was not enabled fo r the directory. I did a chmod-777 (for a brief amt of time) on the subdomain, but still the same error. I am able to access it via ftp, so I don't know what else to do. I have a few other subdomains on the site, and none of them seem to have the same problem. The subdomain is http://nyc.domain.com/ -- is this a file or command name or something? (see this post) Thanks in advance, TCH!

Hey, TCH staff! I wanted to know about this myself: Is it true that using php's mkdir() and/or copy() functions are not doable on TCH hosted directories, as Shannon suggests above? I was hoping to write a little automated script for my own site that would copy files from one directory, create a new dir, and paste the files in the new dir. Would we have to use php ftp commands instead, as Shannon has done? Thanks!

Hello everyone - I'm building a site in which I want to install "regional" sections, wherein users from particular regions would be able to have a section devoted to them (aka atlanta.mysite.com, twincities.mysite.com, etc.) Some of the things I desire: 1) each section must be independent, but retain the main site's header and style, appearance, whatever. That's the easy part. 2) the software must be simple enough to be managed by a novice. I don't consider php-Nuke to be simple enough. 3) More than just a bulletin board, it should have sections unto itself, i.e. links, downloads, calendar. 4) free to use 5) i'm not afraid of getting my hands dirty, as long as it will be easy for someone else to manage in the long run. 6) obviously, the installation can't involve executing a command-line script on the server. Some stuff i tried and don't think is right for this: phpwcms - too complicated phpnuke - nice, but not easy enough, too content-rich and buggy invisionboard, phpbb - both slick, but i don't want the sites to be forums, per se. i appreciate any suggestions, whether helpful or devastating. thanks Billy

Thanks for your help, TCH-Jack! TCH rocks.

Yes, that's what I want to do. It's not so much of a security issue; its a matter of insuring my boss and others that the information is safe from "predators." The mental effect of having to type your password and username everytime is valuable in this respect , even though it would be annoying to me. Am I able to do something like this?

To follow up on TCH-Jim's thoughts - I would recommend using a maximum fixed width of about 600 pixels (width="600"). That way, you are working the generally accepted "lowest common denominator" of screen resolution, 800x600. According to this website, as of August, 2003, a shocking 52% who browse the web use this resolution. Of course, this leaves a lot of white space on the sides, and looks weird in higher resolutions. If you want, you can set the page to align to the left (which it will do by default in most browsers), and put less important material beyond 600 pixels to the right, so that people using this low resolution don't necessarily have to move the scrollbar over to get the jist of the site. Note - According to that site linked above, about 5% of people use a resolution lower than 800x600. I wouldn't worry about these people - after all, we are in the 21st century now. People using these extremely low resolutions are probably used to manually scrolling, anyway.