Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

Re: New Perl Vulnerability?

by bluto (Curate)
on Dec 08, 2005 at 21:39 UTC ( #515393=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to New Perl Vulnerability?

Is this news? This sounds like the sort of thing that taint checking was invented for.

From the article:

You can get something up and running quickly. Presumably, if it's not a one-time type program, you should polish it up afterwards, adding things like error checking and security checks but, shocking as it might seem, this doesn't always happen.

I.e. poor programmers can write bad code -- no big deal. Or how about ...

In fact, from my own experience digging around Perl programs, they're among the sloppiest and most unreadable programs out there.

It's almost as if he's arguing that Perl programs just accumulate syntax trash, no matter how well meaning the programmer was. This is not a flaw of the language.

Update: Removed inflammatory stuff. I know better than to write posts immediately after attending a funeral :-(


Comment on Re: New Perl Vulnerability?
Re^2: New Perl Vulnerability?
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 05, 2007 at 01:19 UTC
    FD had a reference to just Ubuntu. I'd be keen to know exactly what the sitution is here in general - although maybe we will have to wait on a POC.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://515393]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2014-07-22 19:56 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (126 votes), past polls