The Community Forums

Interact with an entire community of cPanel & WHM users!
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

POLL: cPanel hands of mode

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by dgbaker, Oct 24, 2004.

?

Should we have the final say on cPanel changes to certain things?

  1. Yes, in some cases

    13 vote(s)
    65.0%
  2. No, we should do as they suggest

    7 vote(s)
    35.0%
  1. dgbaker

    dgbaker Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,578
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario Canada
    cPanel Access Level:
    DataCenter Provider
    I would like to see the following added to cPanel, an option to NOT allow cPanel software to interfere/change/modify server information arbitrarily without warning or notification or acceptance. Also to have the option to tell cPanel to ignore this or that and do it anyway. Example: If we want to leave 127.0.0.1 in as a resolver that should be our choice. Or how about the quotas and the backups, sorry this partition has more than just the backups and we want the quotas on.

    Anyway, not trying to rant, but I hope you understand my point. Certain things should have no effect on cpanel software doing it's primary job which is account management. And we as the customer, server owners, system administrators, should maintain the right to deny/disallow the software from arbitrarily making changes.
     
  2. cPanelBilly

    cPanelBilly Guest

    alot of things you do have control over. Security things however need to be locked down.
     
  3. dgbaker

    dgbaker Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,578
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario Canada
    cPanel Access Level:
    DataCenter Provider
    Granted and understood, but since cPanel has no idea what and how we do certain things and what are servers are doing exactly, this does cause issues sometimes.
     
  4. nickn

    nickn Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I could see having a method of going in and "acknowledging a warning" IE...

     
  5. dgbaker

    dgbaker Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,578
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario Canada
    cPanel Access Level:
    DataCenter Provider
    I was just using that as an example, plus, not all servers are used as you may think. DNS standards state to use the loopback address for DNS caching. On large systems you WILL take a performance hit by removing the 127 address. See any DNS 101 for more information. If there is a security issue then it is a cpanel issue, every single authoritive on DNS states to use the loopback for local lookups and for caching.

    Unless you know what we use our servers for and what we allow people to do, then the 127 issue is not one and this should be none of cpanel's concerns, I use their software for account management not an authority on DNS nor do I wish to.
     
    mpierre likes this.
  6. nickn

    nickn Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You are correct for a caching only nameserver...you should use 127.0.0.1. But when you're allowing users to blindly place zone files one your server, "any authoritive" would not recommend you run a caching only nameserver that also allows users to add zone records.
     
  7. nickn

    nickn Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    It's a bad idea..but I agree with you, if you want to run something insecurely, it's up to you. cPanel shouldn't try to stop you, as long as it does due justice in trying to advise you against it, you should have a way to override and ignore the error.
     
  8. dgbaker

    dgbaker Well-Known Member
    PartnerNOC

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,578
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario Canada
    cPanel Access Level:
    DataCenter Provider
    Okay, obviously using the 127 was a bad example, (and by the way on some of our servers there are no clients, just friends and family so no issues with it on there.)

    Anyway, the point is I would much prefer having a choice and being properly informed of what cpanel is planning on doing to my servers.
     
  9. kens6139

    kens6139 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Chattanooga, Tennessee, United
    cPanel Access Level:
    Root Administrator
    Actually you can still use 127.0.0.1 it just trips the warning, an option to ignore and turn off the warning would work here.

    I agree that some options like this would benifit us all.
     
Loading...

Share This Page