Building A Web-And Mail Server With CentOS 4.3 26
hausmasta writes "This is a detailed description how to set up a CentOS 4.3 based server that offers all services needed by ISPs and hosters (web server (SSL-capable), mail server (with SMTP-AUTH and TLS!), DNS server, FTP server, MySQL server, POP3/IMAP, Quota, Firewall, etc.). This tutorial is written for the 64-bit version of CentOS 4.3, but should apply to the 32-bit version with very little modifications as well."
The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:4, Informative)
Now, there is nothing wrong with that. Just be aware that some things may not work if you do not install ISPC.
For instance, a newbie following along may not notice that he disable the ability for his server to run php in
I've even seen examples that suggested installing compilers and tools to build modules needed by SpamAssasin. Anyone installing a compiler on a production web server should be shot.
In short, unless you go on to install the ISPc, your site will be broken and may be vulnerable to attack.
So, buyer (reader?) beware! You may not be getting what you want.
Re:The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:2)
It's clearly written in the blurb and in TFA that it's a set of instructions for ISPs, so what are you warning readers about?
Re:The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:2)
Re:The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:2)
Now, the hacker just waits for the user to login and try to "su" or "sudo".
After that, the hacker has
Re:The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:2)
I think the additional exposure this creates on modern systems is vastly overstated.
It's not like compiling code for an x86 Linux machine is a particularly difficult thing to do.
Re:The Perfect Setup Articles (Score:2)
whereas hosting your firewall, dns, database, webserver, ftp & email on the same box is just fine and dandy
Is ISP Config a bad thing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Give the man a clue! (Score:5, Funny)
Centos Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Obvious:
CentOS is Red Hat Enterprise, with a
Not so obvious:
They also recompile for additional arches, most notably Alpha (I have a couple of faculty members who don't want to be rid of their Digital machines; this makes a great alternative to paying $1000+/year for a True64 license to HP who hasn't looked at the code for 4.x since they bought it).
Get it here:
http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.p
There are a LOT of mirrors, and being on the listserv, I see more and more being added all the time. Including lots of tier 1 mirrors at Universities, if you're on Internet2. There are also lots of local mirrors around the world, so if you're not a USAian, check for one in your locale; you may get better speeds than a general mirror.
Best mirror? http://mirror.cs.vt.edu/ [vt.edu] =)
~Will
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Centos Mirror (Score:2)
just want to get my facts straight here
haven't touched redhat for 6 years now, looked at article, don't miss it 1 bit. ubuntu & freebsd are easier
Re:Centos Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Otherwise, CentOS is RHEL. People do pay Redhat to supply support -- for most corp installs, it is that important. There are a few edge cases as well -- if you're running any commercial software, like Oracle, SPSS, or SAS -- you will definitely run RHEL over CentOS, or your vendor won't even talk to you.
For an academic install, RHEL is cheap enough that it's worth the cost ($50/year/host) to have the possibility of support. Just like it's worth the $120/year/host for basic service on Solaris 10 machines.
Re:Centos Mirror (Score:2)
Our fiberchannel SAN only has drivers for RHEL. We have tested it; the drivers are binary compatablie plug-and-go with CentOS; but, you're absolutely right, the systems attached to the SAN use RHEL because of support issues. Without RHEL, we get no support.
~Will
CentOS is NOT RHEL. (Score:2)
On my own accord I'd always choose slackware or the debian-based distros like knoppix and ubuntu. If I need enterprise support I'll go with redhat or suse. CentOS doesnt give me the support.
Moreover I'd only use redhat because the commercial world depends on redhat's linux than any other distro. I can install oracle, websphere, domino etc with minimal pain on redhat. Now CentOS doesnt have the name, which these apps check for. That brings down redhat to the importance of
Support. (Score:2)
That is to say, RHEL is made by a company and usually purchased with a service or support contract, comes in a bunch of grades/flavors for different applications, and comes with a lot of documentation and even has certified training courses.
CentOS is just that -- an Operating System. They don't support it, they don't service it, and you can't send Sean From IT to them to take a few training courses on how to administer it. You can bas
They can complament each other. (Score:2)
RHEL is well worth the money for an Enterprise. CentOS is well worth it to everyone else.
Nice newbie guide I'm sure (Score:1)
However there were a few nice things in the article that are always useful to have around for someone who might be good at Linux, but not an expert on server configuration, especially in these days of Google searches gettin
CentOS is Risky! (Score:1, Funny)
This can be done in one step (Score:3, Interesting)
Centos 64bit + Dovecot == BAD (Score:2)
What amazingly bad advice (Score:4, Informative)
I hope you're feeling lucky, because I've watched my share of servers get hacked during the period between when the firewall etc. was taken down "just for a minute" and when it was turned back on again. Anyone considering following this unsafe tutorial, do yourself a favor and at least practice this much paranoia: download all the packages recommended, then disconnect your network cable during the period when you have the RedHa...er, CentOS firewall service down. Don't reconnect yourself to the network unless a) you've correctly configured the ISPConfig software, or b) you've turned the firewall back on temporarily because you need to download something else.