What makes something secure?(gwan.ch)
gwan.ch
What makes something secure?
http://gwan.ch/blog/20120420.html
9 comments
G-WAN.. secure.. oh wait!
http://lonewolfer.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/intermezzo-about-...
and official response:
http://gwan.ch/en_timeline.html
Search for "New serve cache.c", as page does not have any anchors (and forbids selecting text too).
In current post he also claims "Since 2009, the year of its first public release, no parsing vulnerability of the HTTP protocol has beed found in G-WAN", which is wrong.
Also, you can read official author statement about open source and security: http://forum.gwan.com/index.php?p=/discussion/106/open-sourc...
Quote:
http://lonewolfer.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/intermezzo-about-...
and official response:
http://gwan.ch/en_timeline.html
Search for "New serve cache.c", as page does not have any anchors (and forbids selecting text too).
In current post he also claims "Since 2009, the year of its first public release, no parsing vulnerability of the HTTP protocol has beed found in G-WAN", which is wrong.
Also, you can read official author statement about open source and security: http://forum.gwan.com/index.php?p=/discussion/106/open-sourc...
Quote:
2) Security would be better ensured when you have the scrutiny of other experts
You mean, those experts who publish products that are full of security holes?
"Sturgeon was an optimist. Way more than 90% of code is crap" (Al viro)
Or those other experts who write reports about how to do it right?I benchmarked a bunch of web servers a few years ago and, in the process, heard of GWAN. It seemed ridiculously fast, but also seemed quite limited. Can anyone tell me when I would use GWAN? The description of GWAN lacked a features-functions-benefits breakdown so I wound up avoiding it because I was uncertain of its strengths/weaknesses. That said, it's fast enough to make me wonder what other web servers are missing...
A few WTFs:
In 3 years nobody has found a vulnerability so you can be certain we are secure
Furthermore the homepage seems to make the claim that it will make legacy code transparently scale to parallel multiprocessor systems.
This really raised my snake-oil detector
In 3 years nobody has found a vulnerability so you can be certain we are secure
Furthermore the homepage seems to make the claim that it will make legacy code transparently scale to parallel multiprocessor systems.
This really raised my snake-oil detector
I don't really understand what this is, he is comparing it to nginx but it doesn't seem to be on the same level, is this a webserver that you stick in front of your application like you would do with nginx?
As a budding developer, how should I begin going through the things I create and making them more secure.
In other words, what gives me the most added security for my time spent working on it?
In other words, what gives me the most added security for my time spent working on it?
I'm a fan of his closing statement, though this sticks in particular:
"...there is room for indisputable certainty, that is, initial choices that make unexpected events harmless."
I also code by the ideal that you should have a fine line between expected and unexpected behavior, and generally avoid tacking on special cases as your needs grow. Of course, various realistic constraints make can make this difficult, but that's why it's an "ideal". :-D
"...there is room for indisputable certainty, that is, initial choices that make unexpected events harmless."
I also code by the ideal that you should have a fine line between expected and unexpected behavior, and generally avoid tacking on special cases as your needs grow. Of course, various realistic constraints make can make this difficult, but that's why it's an "ideal". :-D
Write less code.
Spell 'seasoned' properly.
http://simonhf.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/g-wan-versus-sxe-hel... is a benchmark showing sxe, using gwan's benchmark code, as outperforming gwan 1.8x.
Years ago, there were two very fast servers - Zeus and Tux. Tux was a kernel mode accelerator that avoided context switches and Zeus was the de-facto standard of 'fastest userspace webserver'.
Chromium X-15 came along but skipped a few compatibility features, and was labelled 'faster than tux, but in userspace'. Tornado did something similar, very narrow purpose, but, as they started to bolt on all of the pesky RFC stuff, became a top-midline application server.
While GWAN is certainly fast, but not fastest at running its own benchmark, their boasts will ultimately affect public opinion. Language is a barrier - perhaps some of their boastful attitude is merely rough translation.
GWAN's use case basically works around almost every webserver's dream - more cores = odd setups to take advantage of those cores through cpu/irq affinity, etc. GWAN handles that out of the box which is a definite advantage.
If you needed an app to do some calculations and hand back results with the least hardware possible, GWAN would be a top contender. Hardware is still fairly inexpensive that it would take a rather large company that would be able to take true advantage of the cost savings of reducing their hardware outlay based on GWAN's scaling.