Pony99CA

That's interesting, and almost explains things. However, if I set Default to :fail:, then go to Mail->Manage/Add/Remove Accounts, here's what I see: >Address Login Main Account svvgbiz Read Webmail Aging Configure Mail Client Show Disk Space Used The "Main Account" doesn't display any E-mail address, but it appears to somehow be a real account (otherwise how could I read Webmail for it?). Is there any way that I can forward E-mail to that, or is it some kind of pseudo-account that only the Default (Catch-All) address can use? If nothing else can send mail to the "Main Account", I'm willing to create a real E-mail account to forward to. I just want to make sure that's the case so I don't have to check two accounts in Eudora. Steve

OK, I checked my settings, and still get the bounces. Here's what I have: User name: svvgbiz (the one I log into Cpanel with and retrieve E-mail sent to my Default account with) Mail server: mail.svvg.biz Forward set: nospam <at> svvg <dot> biz to svvgbiz <at> svvg <dot> biz (The first attempt) Forward set: nospam <at> svvg <dot> biz to svvgbiz (The second attempt, which seems to get expanded to svvgbiz <at> svvg <dot> biz) Note that I'm trying to get E-mail from svvgbiz (not svvgbiz+svvg.biz) on mail.svvg.biz, which worked before for my Catch-All address. So maybe the problem is that only the Default setting can be set to my main user account. Maybe Forwarders can't send to that default account. If there's someting I'm missing, please let me know before I open a ticket. Steve

I did try it, Andy. It didn't work (as the bounce message shows), which is why I posted here in the first place. I also tried creating <account>@<mydomain>.biz, and that was allowed! However, when I tried to get E-mail using Eudora, I didn't get the E-mail. Logging in and checking my Web mail showed the mail I sent. So apparently I somehow had two <account>@<mydomain>.biz E-mail addresses. I'll check my settings once more, but if that doesn't work, I guess I'll have to open a ticket like Don said. I assumed steve@xxx.com and steve@yyy.com would be disambiguated by the domain name. That's why I thought I had mail.xxx.com vs. mail.yyy.com. It sounds like you're saying that mail.xxx.com and mailyyy.com on the same server really are just for naming convenience. Could steve@xxx.com get his E-mail by using mail.yyy.com? If not, I still don't see why the "steve+xxx.com" is necessary. Steve

The difference is that I don't want to create a new account to forward to. I want to forward to my existing main account (the same one that default used before). Specifically, Eudora is currently configued to log in as <account> on mail.<domain>.biz. Creating a new account would require me to change that to <newaccount>+<domain.biz> on mail.<domain>.biz. (I still don't understand why we need the "+<domain>.biz" stuff, but that's another issue.) And, even if I did that, I'd be worried that I might still get some mail on the main account. Steve

I've been getting Joe-jobbed at my domain name by some pump-and-dump stock loser. (For those that don't know, Joe-jobbing is forging somebody else's domain, usually in spam.) Because I use a Default (or Catch-All) address, I am getting all of the E-mail bounces from this spammer (over 540 since April 13). This loser is using random E-mail addresses at my domain, so I can't easily block them like I could in the past. What I want to do is remove my Default address and add forwarders for the few E-mail addresses I have given out at this domain. Those forwarders should forward E-mail to my main account E-mail address. I added the forwarders to forward to <account>@<mydomain.biz> and set the Default to bounce E-mail. Unfortunately, when I tried to send a test E-mail to one of the addresses I want to forward, I got a bounce saying <account>@<mydomain.biz> wasn't valid as shown below: Why isn't that working? The Default address caught E-mail with no problem, but I can't seem to forward from one address on <mydomain>biz to <account>@<mydomain>biz. I don't want to create real E-mail accounts for the addresses I'm trying to forward because that would require me to add those accounts to Eudora to get any E-mail sent to them. Any ideas? Thanks for any help, Steve

I just got an E-mail bounce from my contact form. I tried to send E-mail to that address and that failed. I logged into my account and found that all of my forwarders were gone and my catch-all was set to :fail: no such address here. I looked in my logs and the only strange thing I saw was this: What happened? Is there something I can do to recover the forwarders? (I didn't back them up myself, of course.) Thanks, Steve

The Web is built on links, and making people type in your E-mail address is a good way to ensure people won't send you feedback. Check out my feedback form. It uses a form to send feedback, but also has my E-mail address at the bottom. The E-mail address is obscured using HTML entity encoding, which works in all the browsers I've tried. I haven't gotten much spam with this setup. Of course, maybe my site just isn't very popular. Steve

Well, I did a search on phpBB 2.0.16 before I posted and scanned down the topic list until I saw the phpBB 2.0.15 topic. Unfortunately, my search attempt failed because it seems that this board system searches by phrases, not words, and so didn't find the "phpBB V 2.0.16" thread. My second attempt failed because somebody posted to the phpBB 2.0.15 thread after the last post to the phpBB 2.0.16 thread. Sorry about the duplicate post but you can't be too secure. Steve

phpBB 2.0.16 has been released. It fixes a critical security error and some other bugs. See the phpBB forum for a full description and update your forums right away. Get the update from the phpBB Download page. Steve

I patched the remote execution vulnerability when I read about this problem (likely on C|Net) last year. However, I had not upgraded to phpBB 2.0.11 (it didn't seem to be available on my server, if I recall). Last Friday (2/11), I got an E-mail telling me I was running an insecure version of phpBB. I just now (2/14 2:45 AM PST or so) upgraded to 2.0.11. However, I have three questions. First, why did it take so long to get this E-mail? This thread was started back in November, so it took over two months to get warned. Second, the message said if I didn't upgrade within 24 hours, my forum would be disabled. I didn't notice the E-mail until 24 hours were up (my laptop died Friday, so I was worrying about that). Did my forum get disabled? It seemed to be working just before I upgraded, so I'm wondering if that "24 hours" was just a minimum or if it was actually referring to one business day (which would be appropriate for a note sent on a Friday). Finally, I seemed to be getting some errors regarding phpBB and MySQL. Here they are: Are those indications that my forum was disabled, was somebody trying to hack my forum or is there some other explanation? The forum is still working for me after the upgrade, but would somebody verify that other users can see it? It's at http://forum.svpocketpc.com if you'd care to check it. Thanks, Steve

I just saw these errors in my log: Are those spammers trying to find code to exploit and send spam with? It's interesting that they occurred at about the same time, but came from different IP addresses. I have my own form mailing script which doesn't use those scripts. After my last question, I also checked the HP page, which didn't use any of those scripts, either. Steve

Ah, that makes sense. I had fixed the obvious links (graphics), but didn't think to look for other links. Did you just search my pages for the ".do" links to find what page had the error? I had searched on the mailto link in the local copy of my site, but didn't get any hits. As I didn't realize I had any .do links, I didn't try searching for them. Thanks for the heads up. Thumbs Up Steve

I occasionally see a bunch of errors in my error log as shown below: I don't even have a service directory in my public_html directory, so this isn't somebody using a broken link somewhere. (I don't even know what .do files are.) Is somebody scanning the network looking for vulnerabilities? If so, should I ban that IP address to avoid bandwidth usage? Steve

I uploaded it with the same FTP client (FTP Genius) as the script that works. I didn't have .pl files listed as ASCII (I thought I had), but, as indicated, the other script worked fine. I'll try changing it and see what happens, though. As for CHMOD, I had already changed the file to RWX, R-X, R-X (I knew I forgot to mention something). UPDATE: OK, it worked now. One thing that I noticed was that I now have additional script files in the cgi-bin directory. When my guest book script wasn't working, it was the only script file there, but now there are the following files: cgiecho cgiemail entropybanner.cgi randhtml.cgi I did visit CPanel's CGI Center and execute the simple CGI wrapper script, but that only seemed to create an scgi-bin directory. Does it do something else? (And what is the difference between the cgi-bin directory and the scgi-bin directory?) But, whatever happened, things seem to be working now. (This isn't the first time mysterious things have happened; one of my pages wasn't showing graphics for some reason, then started showing them again even though I didn't change any HTML near the graphics.) Steve

I got my guest book script running on the main site of my reseller account with just a little tweaking. However, that same basic script is not running on another site on an account that I created. When I try to run the script on the account I created, I get a 500 error. The error log says: I put in the following simple script as a test and got the same error: >#!/usr/bin/perl # # Generic form mailing script # # NOTE: Because this script may be running on a different account than # the Web site, it requires FULLY-QUALIFIED URLs. # #Initialize variables # # # Write out return HTML page # # Write HTML header # print "Content-type: text/html\n\n"; print "<HTML>\n"; print "<HEAD>\n"; print "<TITLE>Silicon Valley Pocket PC Contact Results</TITLE>\n"; print "</HEAD>\n"; print "<BODY>\n"; print "<H1>Testing script</H1>\n"; # # Write HTML end # print "</BODY>\n"; print "</HTML>\n"; Here's the FORM code I'm using to run the script: ><FORM ACTION="http://www.svpocketpc.com/cgi-bin/svppc-contact.pl" METHOD=POST> I'm probably not pointing to the correct location in the FORM code. The premature end of the script headers probably means that it's trying to run a non-existent script, so what path should I use? Note that the same guest book script runs fine with that FORM HTML pointing to my ISP, but I'm probably going to be leaving that ISP soon, so I need it running on TCH. I think this is the last major piece to getting my site completely ported to TCH. Thanks for any help, Steve

That's sort of what I was asking about. On my Pocket PC site (http://www.svpocketpc.com), I have a links page (svvgppclinks.html). Currently, I also have a sub-domain for that page (http://links.svpocketpc.com). If I one day decided to get the domain coolpocketpclinks.com, could I point that domain to links.svpocketpc.com. My reading of the AUP says no. However, it doesn't seem to prohibit me from pointing coolpocketpclinks.com to www.svpocketpc.com/svvgppclinks.html, because that's technically not a sub-domain. If the former is not allowed, but the latter is, the rule seems kind of silly. I can understand not wanting people to provide hosting for others without a reseller account, but, if that's what the sub-domain rule is trying to prevent, they should just say something like sub-domains are meant for people in your own family or company and may not be used to host Web sites for non-affiliated parties. If there's some other reason to prohibit using sub-domains like that (maybe sub-domains require more DNS resolution that direct page references don't), I'd like to know that, too. I'm not trying to host somebody else's Web site (so Rob's analogy about sub-leasing doesn't really apply), but I wouldn't want to have to pay for two accounts or a reseller account if I didn't have to. Steve

Say you wanted to get another domain name, and another and yet another. With a reseller account you just purchase the domains and add them. As long as you don't exceed the bandwidth and storage limits of your reseller account. If you had individual accounts, you would have to purchase additional hosting plans. Right, I understand that much. But if I have fewer than five domains, from a cost perspective, I get more disk space and greater combined bandwidth for less money by purchasing separate hosting accounts than by purchasing a reseller account. Once I hit five domains, the basic reseller account will be cheaper (but only by $0.05) as long as I can fit in the lower total disk space and bandwidth. That's assuming that I pay month-by-month; if I pay yearly for a non-reseller account, the break-even point is six domains. So I guess I need to know whether Total Choice would allow combining separate accounts into a reseller account if I decide to do that at some point. Also, can you pay by the year for a reseller account and get the one month free? As long as you don't exceed the disk space or bandwidth allotments, I wouldn't think it would be an issue. Of course, TCH probably makes a reasonable assumption that not everyone maxes out their disk space and bandwidth, and allocates domains to servers based on some average usage, not a worst-case scenario. But if multiple people really can set up Web sites on sub-domains legitimately, as you mentioned, does it really matter if a domain name points to that sub-domain, or if the people list their URL including the sub-domain? For example, I host my personal page at http://steve.svpocketpc.com. From a disk space point of view, it doesn't matter whether or not I get a domain name to point to that sub-domain. From a bandwidth point of view, I doubt it matters much, either. I doubt pointing something like www.stevesdomain.com to steve.svpocketpc.com would generate more traffic. Of course, my reading of the Acceptable Use Policy would prohibit hosting other people's sites or domains on your non-reseller account, regardless of whether or not they pointed a domain name at the sub-domain so it could be a moot point. One reason that I'm asking all these questions is because I'm comparing TCH against another hosting company. I like that TCH is less expensive, of course, and gives more disk space, but I also like a couple of intangibles -- TCH just looks more professional, I like the feedback I've seen about TCH and TCH is based in Michigan (I'm originally from Michigan ). However, one thing LowestCost has going for them is a much higher bandwidth allowance -- 200 GB -- for less than $1.00 per month more. Now, honestly, with my current Web sites, even 50 MB disk space would be more than enough, and 5.5 GB should be enough bandwidth unless my traffic increases more than 5x. However, unless I add forums to my site, I suspect bandwidth will become an issue before disk space. If TCH gave more bandwidth in the current prices, TCH would be the hands-down winner from what I've found. As it is, they still seem to be the best, but it's not as clear-cut. Steve

As they're all my domains, I don't know why I'd need a reseller account. For my current needs of three domains, wouldn't three starter accounts be cheaper ($12.00 vs. $19.95) and give me more disk space (900 MB vs. 550 MB) and bandwidth (16.5 GB vs. 8 GB)? Are there any benefits of getting a reseller account that I'm missing, other than easier management, perhaps? If I can convince this local travel agency to put up a Web site, a reseller account would be useful, of course. Steve

OK, so I can't provide hosting for other people, which is certainly reasonable. That would even seem to prohibit what you said above, though: I know the TOS for the forums says we can't rely on the accuracy of what is said, but sometimes it's all we have. Is that something that the Acceptable Use Policy prohibits just in case people abuse it, but you generally allow? However, I don't have any intention of hosting for other people. I just have three domains that are mine which I'd like to host. Would I have to get three separate hosting accounts (or a reseller account), or could I put them all on the same account? For reference, the domains are Silicon Valley Video Group, Silicon Valley Pocket PC and Alyssa's Anime. The first two are quasi-related domains; the third is my domain, but I let my daughter use it. None of these are really high-traffic sites; the most popular (I think) gets fewer than 300 page views per day (although, obviously, I would like that to improve Thumbs Up). I read the Acceptable Use Policy, and found a clause which said, "You may only host one domain per virtual account; resellers are allowed to host unlimited domains." That would even seem to prohibit having two domain names for the same Web site (like my-domain.com and ****). I'm just trying to determine how many accounts I need (or whether I should get a reseller account). I'm not trying to get around anything; I just want to avoid violating any terms from the beginning while paying as little as legitimately allowed. Steve

Almost. I'm thinking of hosting some sites here and wanted to follow-up. Does that mean that you don't provide a mechanism to point a domain name to a sub-domain, or that I'm not allowed to do it at all (via a third-party URL forwarding mechanism)? If the latter, is pointing another domain name at a specific page on your primary domain allowed? If so, is there really much difference between pointing a domain name at subsite.domain.com and pointing it at domain.com/subsite.html? If pointing another domain at a hosted site isn't allowed at all, maybe a reseller account would be better for me. If I have a non-reseller account, and decide I want a reseller account, is there any problem upgrading? Thanks for any help, Steve