From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b1150caefb87348f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-06 01:51:22 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: chris User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030925 Thunderbird/0.3 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Advocacy - WPG (Web Page Generation) scheme References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 09:56:48 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.98.236.164 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net 1065430282 81.98.236.164 (Mon, 06 Oct 2003 09:51:22 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 09:51:22 BST Organization: ntl Cablemodem News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:297 Date: 2003-10-06T09:56:48+01:00 List-Id: Nick Roberts wrote: > There are no security risks associated with CGI itself. There are various > potential security risks associated with badly designed, badly implemented, > or inappropriately configured servers, and with any program executed in > response to a web page request (be it a CGI program or a server-side script) > which is badly designed, badly implemented, or inappropriately configured. Perhaps, but CGI has a reputation for being old and a lot of trouble and has largely been replaced by DSLs like PHP and ASP.