On Fri, February 22, 2013 5:51 am, Namson Mon wrote:
> Hi Ian, we've just published an extensive blog post about how to achieve
> this kind of hotlinking protection against Google Images:
just curious...unless I missed it in the article...how are you adding the
GET param for visitors, but not for
for those using wordpress, WP-PICShield can be helpful, do almost
everything you want or not :)
- Pass-Through Images Request
- Caching Support,
- Custom image transprency
- Anti-IFRAME Protection,
- Custom PNG watermark
- HostName over images as url and/or in QR-BarCode !!!
- Protection ag
Setup: php5-fpm listening on socket + nginx 1.2.6
Wanted to use mod_auth_request for www authentication. Works fine for GET
requests, POST requests time out with error 504.
Error log:
2013/02/24 00:13:03 [error] 24004#0: *13 auth request unexpected status: 504
while sending to client, client: 80.
Just wanted to respond that I had the similar need, and hopefully a
better solution. We too have dev, staging, prod, and the configurations
are similar, but not identical.
We have hundreds of servers, and the variances in files means we need to
have a much longer runway for new sysadm recruits t
On 22/02/2013 5:51 AM, Namson Mon wrote:
Hi Ian, we've just published an extensive blog post about how to achieve
this kind of hotlinking protection against Google Images:
http://pixabay.com/en/blog/posts/hotlinking-protection-and-watermarking-for-google-32/
Thanks for the link. I like the i
Hello list,
While using nginx 1.3.12 + transmission-daemon 2.77 + Ubuntu 12.04,
# /etc/transmission-daemon/settings.json
...
"rpc-bind-address": "127.0.0.1",
"rpc-port": 9091,
"rpc-url": "/transmission/",
...
ls -l /etc/nginx/.htpasswdtrans
-rw-r- 1 root www-data 64 .
Hi,
Is there a 1.3.13 deb package for ubuntu with a websocket support?
The ppa has 1.3.12
https://launchpad.net/~nginx/+archive/development
Is this ppa official and can be trusted?
Is it safe to use 1.3.13 in production as a replacement for the package
from the ubuntu official repository or is it
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 02:05:56AM +0400, Valentin V. Bartenev wrote:
> On Saturday 23 February 2013 00:11:26 Francis Daly wrote:
> >location ~ ^(?.+\.php)(?/.*|$) {
>location ~ ^(?.+\.php)(?/.*)?$ {
>
> looks better.
Agreed.
And it means I don't have to think about whether
