Re: [cobalt-users] My .htaccess files are hidden.

[Kris Dahl <krislists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

on 9/25/00 12:40 PM, Mike Allton at asuservice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:



>>>> Could someone tell me how to make my .htaccess files visible.
>>>> 
>>>> I ftp the htaccess file to my server but when i change the name to
>>>> .htaccess it disappears "becomes hidden".
>>> 
>>> This is the way it is, mainly for security reasons, you wouldn't want hack
>>> happy users to gain access. You need to Telnet to your dir to delete or
>> use
>>> VI or Vim to view and edit on-line. The file will still be hidden from
>>> view, but it will be there as long as you're in the right directory :-)
>> 
>> That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard.  It isn't for security
>> reasons at all.  It is because . files are for configuration files and are
>> not normally wanted to be seen when doing a directory listing.
>> 
>> On my home directory I have in excess of 60 . files, none of which I usually
>> want to see.  And it I want to see them I just use the -a switch on ls.
>> 
>> And if you want to see, edit, or download a file that starts with a period
>> you need to get a better FTP client.  The file is there.  There is nothing
>> that is preventing you from downloading, uploading, or doing whatever to it.
>> Many FTP clients don't show the files by default, and many have an option
>> you can set.  If your FTP client can do neither, I would suggest canning it
>> and getting a real FTP client--I suggest ncFTP.
> 
> Kris I have to take exception to your point regarding the FTP client. I use
> the latest version of WSFTP. I am in the process of moving all my sites from
> shared hosting providers (specific server hardware unknown) to my Raq2 and I
> can view all . files on the old server but not the Raq2.

What I was saying was a 'load of crap' is the comment regarding it being a
'security' issue.  It is not.  It is a convenience issue.

If you are moving from a shared server to the Raq2, I imagine the diffence
is in the 'ls' command.  The Raq2 probably uses the standard 'strict'
version that doesn't by default show those files in a normal execution of
the command.  Perhaps your provider decided for convenience of their users
to just have the '.' files show up.  It is possible to do that (although you
may need to recompile 'ls').  Natrually if that is the case, then it is a
rare one.

Proper use of switches on the 'ls' command is the responsibility of the
client, not the server.
 
> On the possibility there was a setting I was unaware of in the ftp config
> for the old account I copied it to a new location and only changed the ftp
> server & login info. Still I couldn't see the . files.
> 
> By no means do I call my self a guru and usually use telnet to deal with
> these files but I just wanted to mention my findings and what I've seen thru
> the years.

I am thinking that perhaps your current provider has their servers set up a
little bit different--it is possible.  Essentially it would help users of
freeware win32 FTP apps that may not be 100% compliant with various *nix FTP
directory listing utils, etc.  But it would actually hurt people that are
using FTP clients that do conform to the standard switches, etc.

Cheers,
-k