Many sites don't really require all that for them to run,
and it's crazy to me that something as read heavy as a
blog often can't perform well under load given that it's
just serving up the same old stuff over and over again.
You want to have some tooling to make it easier, but it
doesn't need to be run time tooling.
Woah, that makes a tremendous amount of sense, I'm really surprised this kind of thing wasn't developed and caught on big earlier. No more worrying about security upgrades, no more worrying about overusing limited computing resources, no more worrying about giving things like Wordpress to people who don't understand the vast security implications, etc. etc.
I am curious about this seemingly common perception that Wordpress is an insecure product. Is Wordpress, when configured correctly, far less secure than other platforms? (My main thinking is that it is an obvious target due to its incredible marketshare)
A client I had was recently terrified of using Wordpress because an 'SEO expert' had filled her head with conjecture about the insecurity of Wordpress compared to Drupal, referring anecdotally to the White House website using Drupal as some sort of indicator that Drupal is infinitely more secure.
I'm just curious if you believe there are inherent risks in Wordpress, or if you meant specifically Wordpress in the wrong hands and with the wrong plugins/extensions etc.
I'm just curious if you believe there are inherent risks in Wordpress, or if you meant specifically Wordpress in the wrong hands and with the wrong plugins/extensions etc.
Well, in the context of submission link -- serving straight up static HTML content, you have essentially zero risk of security vulnerabilities. I meant to contrast this in a general sense with Wordpress, so I moreso did mean to imply Wordpress is insecure for both its inherent risks (fewer or greater than Drupal) and risks that come with plugins (which a significant amount of Wordpress users do end up getting).
Comments
I am curious about this seemingly common perception that Wordpress is an insecure product. Is Wordpress, when configured correctly, far less secure than other platforms? (My main thinking is that it is an obvious target due to its incredible marketshare)
A client I had was recently terrified of using Wordpress because an 'SEO expert' had filled her head with conjecture about the insecurity of Wordpress compared to Drupal, referring anecdotally to the White House website using Drupal as some sort of indicator that Drupal is infinitely more secure.
However, looking at CVE data, I don't find massive discrepancies, in fact Drupal had more listed vulnerabilities (almost double) than Wordpress in 2014. Compare the CVE statistics for Drupal http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/1367/Drupal.html vs. Wordpress http://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/2337/Wordpress.html
I'm just curious if you believe there are inherent risks in Wordpress, or if you meant specifically Wordpress in the wrong hands and with the wrong plugins/extensions etc.
Well, in the context of submission link -- serving straight up static HTML content, you have essentially zero risk of security vulnerabilities. I meant to contrast this in a general sense with Wordpress, so I moreso did mean to imply Wordpress is insecure for both its inherent risks (fewer or greater than Drupal) and risks that come with plugins (which a significant amount of Wordpress users do end up getting).