4 ms·

Always surprised when some of these sites shut down. The operating cost seems low and putting on a few ads (ethical, non-intrusive, etc.) can net you passive $1

Always surprised when some of these sites shut down. The operating cost seems low and putting on a few ads (ethical, non-intrusive, etc.) can net you passive $100+/mo.

michaelcampbell 3y ago
It's more than money, they still require care and feeding. At some age (and I'm getting to that), you just tire of being a sysadm, esp. for "home"/hobby stuff.
- kekebo 3y ago
  A historical archive of something should allow for robust, non-interactive ways to persist. Maybe there should be standards for this. In the mean time we can find gratitude to archive.org and similar services
- bayindirh 3y ago
  Even if it's a static HTML, you need to patch your webserver, OS, and migrate the whole stack to newer versions. This is why I'm scaling down my home infrastructure to SBCs and run everything on Debian with stock package repositories. It reduces tons of burden to something very manageable.
  - tomrod 3y ago
    Non-sysadmin here. For static HTML, why is server patching/OS needed if things are locked down?
    - bayindirh 3y ago
      A webserver like Apache and NGINX are way more complex than they look. It's sometimes possible to exploit bugs with benign/simple requests, even if you don't run advanced stacks on them. See [0] for example. If you're not running strict firewall rules to limit your SSH access and if you expose other services outside, they also need constant patching against newer attacks. Lastly, security standards evolve. Your SSH and SSL layers need to be kept up to date to patch holes and add newer algorithms while deprecating others, further reducing the attack surface [1]. [0]: https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/50383 https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/50383 [1]: https://lists.mindrot.org/pipermail/openssh-unix-announce/2024-January/000156.html https://lists.mindrot.org/pipermail/openssh-unix-announce/20...
    - toyg 3y ago
      Because no software is perfect, which means every lock has weaknesses that sooner or later get found out. Chances are that, say, a Linux 2.x server that was considered "very secure" in 2005 would now be pwned in a few hours.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      Because both the Linux kernel and whatever SSL and web server stack you use regularly have their remotely exploitable vulnerabilities.
    - boring_twenties 3y ago
      Static HTML means you don't have your own code to worry about vulnerabilities in. Vulnerabilities in the server or OS software don't just go away.
  - jefftk 3y ago
    If it's static HTML you can put it on Github Pages and leave it alone.
    - bayindirh 3y ago
      Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. Sometimes you will, sometimes you won't. :)
  - johnklos 3y ago
    "Even if it's just static text, you need to patch your OS, update your text editor and migrate the whole document to newer versions." Nah. That's bull. A static site can be put on a web server and the site never needs to be updated again. I have web sites people started hosting on my servers in the '90s that are still there, still serving, and haven't been touched in twenty years. Sure, I update the servers and software, but the actual amount of work needed for the site is, quite literally, zero.
    - redcobra762 3y ago
      Which ones? …for research purposes only, of course.
      - johnklos 3y ago
        I have several dozen that go back at least two decades, but I don't think I should post them without asking the owners. OTOH, here's a rather public one: http://www.baloneypotd.com/ http://www.baloneypotd.com/
    - TylerE 3y ago
      Someone has to run the server. That's the point.
      - KomoD 3y ago
        For $100+/mo you can easily have someone manage that.
        bayindirh 3y ago
        For simple servers, unattended upgrades and an automatic mail whenever server needs a restart (like kernel updates) is enough. I'd put that $100 to a piggy bank every month instead.
        TylerE 3y ago
        Easily said when it's not your $100/mo for something that no longer interests you.
  - progman32 3y ago
    Stick it on s3, tell cloudfront to serve from the bucket, and let that sucker run almost unattended till aws shuts down.
    - bayindirh 3y ago
      Why complicate everything when I can serve it with webfs (a tiny webserver), from a tiny SBC from a cabinet in my room, or from a VM and concentrate all my services to it while paying not too much money and have all the flexibility in the world? I don't like to use oversized tools for small jobs. Also, it's not fun.
  - qingcharles 3y ago
    No, you definitely don't. I'm pretty sure no-one has performed one single update on my old server since we installed it in 1996: http://resworld.eolith.net/staff.html http://resworld.eolith.net/staff.html I don't remember if it is Linux or *BSD now, but I don't even know how you would update a kernel or libraries that old lol
    - bayindirh 3y ago
      I can say that the server in question is updated at least until 2010. However, some of the software running on it has some (read: quite a few) weaknesses as far as I can see. ...and it has ports open. Maybe you should give it a backrub, IDK. It's possible to iteratively update that thing AFAICS.
hombre_fatal 3y ago
> a few ads (ethical, non-intrusive, etc.) can net you passive $100+/mo. No way. That's barely true of Adsense anymore much less whatever non-Adsense network you have in mind. And not for a dead site like bash.org.

Always surprised when some of these sites shut down. The operating cost seems low and putting on a few ads (ethical, non-intrusive, etc.) can net you passive $100+/mo.

michaelcampbell 3y ago

It's more than money, they still require care and feeding. At some age (and I'm getting to that), you just tire of being a sysadm, esp. for "home"/hobby stuff.

kekebo 3y ago
A historical archive of something should allow for robust, non-interactive ways to persist. Maybe there should be standards for this. In the mean time we can find gratitude to archive.org and similar services
bayindirh 3y ago
Even if it's a static HTML, you need to patch your webserver, OS, and migrate the whole stack to newer versions. This is why I'm scaling down my home infrastructure to SBCs and run everything on Debian with stock package repositories. It reduces tons of burden to something very manageable.
- tomrod 3y ago
  Non-sysadmin here. For static HTML, why is server patching/OS needed if things are locked down?
  - bayindirh 3y ago
    A webserver like Apache and NGINX are way more complex than they look. It's sometimes possible to exploit bugs with benign/simple requests, even if you don't run advanced stacks on them. See [0] for example. If you're not running strict firewall rules to limit your SSH access and if you expose other services outside, they also need constant patching against newer attacks. Lastly, security standards evolve. Your SSH and SSL layers need to be kept up to date to patch holes and add newer algorithms while deprecating others, further reducing the attack surface [1]. [0]: https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/50383 https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/50383 [1]: https://lists.mindrot.org/pipermail/openssh-unix-announce/2024-January/000156.html https://lists.mindrot.org/pipermail/openssh-unix-announce/20...
  - toyg 3y ago
    Because no software is perfect, which means every lock has weaknesses that sooner or later get found out. Chances are that, say, a Linux 2.x server that was considered "very secure" in 2005 would now be pwned in a few hours.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    Because both the Linux kernel and whatever SSL and web server stack you use regularly have their remotely exploitable vulnerabilities.
  - boring_twenties 3y ago
    Static HTML means you don't have your own code to worry about vulnerabilities in. Vulnerabilities in the server or OS software don't just go away.
- jefftk 3y ago
  If it's static HTML you can put it on Github Pages and leave it alone.
  - bayindirh 3y ago
    Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. Sometimes you will, sometimes you won't. :)
- johnklos 3y ago
  "Even if it's just static text, you need to patch your OS, update your text editor and migrate the whole document to newer versions." Nah. That's bull. A static site can be put on a web server and the site never needs to be updated again. I have web sites people started hosting on my servers in the '90s that are still there, still serving, and haven't been touched in twenty years. Sure, I update the servers and software, but the actual amount of work needed for the site is, quite literally, zero.
  - redcobra762 3y ago
    Which ones? …for research purposes only, of course.
    - johnklos 3y ago
      I have several dozen that go back at least two decades, but I don't think I should post them without asking the owners. OTOH, here's a rather public one: http://www.baloneypotd.com/ http://www.baloneypotd.com/
  - TylerE 3y ago
    Someone has to run the server. That's the point.
    - KomoD 3y ago
      For $100+/mo you can easily have someone manage that.
      - bayindirh 3y ago
        For simple servers, unattended upgrades and an automatic mail whenever server needs a restart (like kernel updates) is enough. I'd put that $100 to a piggy bank every month instead.
      - TylerE 3y ago
        Easily said when it's not your $100/mo for something that no longer interests you.
- progman32 3y ago
  Stick it on s3, tell cloudfront to serve from the bucket, and let that sucker run almost unattended till aws shuts down.
  - bayindirh 3y ago
    Why complicate everything when I can serve it with webfs (a tiny webserver), from a tiny SBC from a cabinet in my room, or from a VM and concentrate all my services to it while paying not too much money and have all the flexibility in the world? I don't like to use oversized tools for small jobs. Also, it's not fun.
- qingcharles 3y ago
  No, you definitely don't. I'm pretty sure no-one has performed one single update on my old server since we installed it in 1996: http://resworld.eolith.net/staff.html http://resworld.eolith.net/staff.html I don't remember if it is Linux or *BSD now, but I don't even know how you would update a kernel or libraries that old lol
  - bayindirh 3y ago
    I can say that the server in question is updated at least until 2010. However, some of the software running on it has some (read: quite a few) weaknesses as far as I can see. ...and it has ports open. Maybe you should give it a backrub, IDK. It's possible to iteratively update that thing AFAICS.

hombre_fatal 3y ago

> a few ads (ethical, non-intrusive, etc.) can net you passive $100+/mo. No way. That's barely true of Adsense anymore much less whatever non-Adsense network you have in mind. And not for a dead site like bash.org.