I'm surprised people still actively use it and it seems on par with nginx, at least according to https://www.netcraft.com/blog/january-2023-web-server-survey...
Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
11–20 of 47 posts
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#12I'm surprised people still actively use it and it seems on par with nginx, at least according to https://www.netcraft.com/blog/january-2023-web-server-survey...
I'm surprised you're surprised. It's a good web server.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#13I'm surprised people still actively use it and it seems on par with nginx, at least according to https://www.netcraft.com/blog/january-2023-web-server-survey...
Why surprised? It's rock solid, stable, fast, and does pretty much everything you need, and nothing is hidden behind premium tiers, unlike nginx where they leave bugs and awful behaviour in the open source version that aren't in the premium ones (e.g. nginx used to only resolve hostname entries on start-up, https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,215830,215832#msg-215832, so if you used a hostname in proxy_pass, and the DNS changed, oops sorry. Actual honouring of DNS TTLs used to be a premium only feature)
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#14[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#15I'm surprised people still actively use it and it seems on par with nginx, at least according to https://www.netcraft.com/blog/january-2023-web-server-survey...
I'm surprised you're surprised. It's a good web server.
I'm surprised HN hasn't added a feature where if you start a comment with "I'm surprised" it asks you to tick a box to confirm that you're really sure you're contributing to the discussion.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm surprised you're surprised. It's a good web server.
I'm surprised HN hasn't added a feature where if you start a comment with "I'm surprised" it asks you to tick a box to confirm that you're really sure you're contributing to the discussion.
Usually when I’m surprised about something, I realize that I am uninformed or out of touch.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#17Is HTTP/2 just too complex for a mere mortal to implement?
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#18I'm surprised people still actively use it and it seems on par with nginx, at least according to https://www.netcraft.com/blog/january-2023-web-server-survey...
I agree after all Node.js is Bad Ass Rockstar Tech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzkRVzciAZg&t=1s
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#19Is HTTP/2 just too complex for a mere mortal to implement?
Sounds like the OAuth2 spec.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.4.58 (CVE fixes)
#20Is HTTP/2 just too complex for a mere mortal to implement?
I don't think this has too much to do with the spec and more about discovering and preventing DoS vectors.