From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu May 18 15:33:28 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id PAA22174
          for questions-outgoing; Thu, 18 May 1995 15:33:28 -0700
Received: from haven.ios.com (haven.ios.com [198.4.75.45])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA22166
          for <questions@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 18 May 1995 15:33:25 -0700
Received: (from rashid@localhost) by haven.ios.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA28857; Thu, 18 May 1995 18:36:04 -0400
From: "Rashid Karimov." <rashid@haven.ios.com>
Message-Id: <199505182236.SAA28857@haven.ios.com>
Subject: Re: WWW without httpd
To: smmcgee@ncbc.edu (Sean McGee)
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 18:36:04 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: questions@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <199505180814.IAA23219@localhost> from "Sean McGee" at May 18, 95 08:13:17 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1560      
Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

		Hi there,

> 
> To avoid having to buy, install, and maintain a http server, yet have 
> the ability to respond to http request, I did the following.
> Please tell me if there are any potential security risks.
> 
> (I run FreeBSD 2.0R (4.2BSD))

	Hmmmmm ... Looks to me that you already did 99% of the job and
	paid 100% of money :)
	The httpd daemon is free - unless you have to hire somebody to configure
	it.
	The httpd binaries for FreeBSD ( which is actually BSD4.4) are available
	at ftp.freebsd.org - grab  them , configure few parameters and
	rock the planet! 
> 
> My /etc/services listens to port 80(default) for http requests.  So in my
> inetd.conf I simply add a line:
> www  stream  tcp  nowait  root   /bin/cat    cat /filename.html
> 
> Now, when an http client contacts that port, the file 'filename.html'
> is catted back to them and is performing the function of a
> 'poor man's http server'
> 
> I have now assigned several ports to do the same thing in order to layer
> pages.
> I have even assigned a .gif file to a port and as long as the http client
> is told that it is a gif, then it has no problems displaying it as a gif.
> example:
> http://some.place.com:80   and   http://some.place.com:80/bogusfile.gif
> do the exact same thing, but the client sees the 'bogusfile.gif' and
> displays the file as a gif.
> 
> My questions are:
> What is the catch?  Have I missed something?

	The catch is good , but you miss a lot - actually you don't have
	the protocol at all - but if you're satisfied with it, enjoy
	the ride :)


	Rashid