<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[HyperForum — [apache2] Discussion about Webserver and logging]]></title>
		<link>https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=444</link>
		<atom:link href="https://forums.hyperbola.info/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=444&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in [apache2] Discussion about Webserver and logging.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:08:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[[apache2] Discussion about Webserver and logging]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?pid=2555#p2555</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello together, what do you think about the standards of Apache-Webserver logging per default every access on hosted data? I don&#039;t think this was a really good development and decision. So the question is: Should the apache2-package be part of Hyperbola in the future? No, I don&#039;t want to exclude the package. But perhaps it is better to do a research for the best default settings being therefore part of the package, so the webserver can protect the data but also the accessing users when installed?</p><p>The consortium of Apache received 2000 much criticism for releasing a default configuration being not compliant towards the privacy of everybody and so far this did not changed at all. <img src="https://forums.hyperbola.info/img/smilies/sad.png" width="15" height="15" alt="sad" /></p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (throgh)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?pid=2555#p2555</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
