[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cd with multiple arguments?
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: cd with multiple arguments? |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:45:12 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
Marc Herbert wrote:
> If the shell was "real" programming language, then we would not have
> such a massive ban on setuid scripts (I am not saying setuid is a
> great feature, this is not the point here; the point is why is the
> shell the only language under such a ban?)
The shell isn't the only one that introduces a security vulnerability
on most systems when setuid. All interpreters are the same in that
regard. On systems where you shouldn't suid scripts then you
shouldn't suid any of the set of sh/perl/python/ruby scripts either.
I think most people would consider at least one of those in that set a
real programming language. :-)
Bob
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, (continued)
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Chris Jones, 2010/12/10
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/13
- Message not available
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Stephane CHAZELAS, 2010/12/13
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/14
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Chris F.A. Johnson, 2010/12/14
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/15
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Illia Bobyr, 2010/12/15
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Illia Bobyr, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Greg Wooledge, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?,
Bob Proulx <=
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/16
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Bob Proulx, 2010/12/16
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Greg Wooledge, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Illia Bobyr, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Bob Proulx, 2010/12/17
- Re: cd with multiple arguments?, Marc Herbert, 2010/12/20