Friday, May 29, 2009

the case for fsock

I know security is high on web hosting but is it really necessary to only enable fsock to port 80 and not a few other ports. Bluehost only allows port 80 and claims on their help faq that it is required for bandwidth tracking but allows a 30 dollar additional yearly fee for a dedicated ip which will open up the rest of the ports. Arggh. Why do hosting companies do this. Netfirms is even more ridiculous. They use to allow fsock to other ports since at least december 2008(I am pretty sure) but now only port 80. Not that it really matters since their hosting is exceptionally unreliable due to their databases always overloaded spitting out errors from any content management system. Sigh. Now I can't even park a few dozen websites and use fsock to send out emails from google apps with my domain.

When did web hosts do this? Can't they understand their email features are practically useless and it helps everybody when people can fsock out to their own smtp servers. The horror.

No comments:

Post a Comment