Re: Bundling "modern" extensions

From: Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:04:02 +0000
Subject: Re: Bundling "modern" extensions
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message


Am 07.06.2011 14:44, schrieb David Muir:
> On 07/06/11 18:40, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> there is a reason for example to disallow many functions
>> on a webserver - so every API has to make sure they
>> can not be bypassed
>>
>> "because we can" is no valid reason for everything because
>> we can install binary extension as they exist now and
>> if you can not you are missing the permissions for some
>> good reasons
>>
> 
> So you're saying that PECL, PNI or FFI should should be actively
> discouraged because of security concerns?

WHERE i said this?
PECL-Extensions can NOT be enabled by the user

> What exactly are the security issues?
> I'm really trying to figure out where you're coming from

look in the php-changelogs how often "open_base_dir" was bypassed
in the past and think about a low-level API for writing extensions
installed by a user - after that think about how many idiots out
there driving servers into a security-hell only with PHP and what
the impact will be give them a low-level API



Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] OpenPGP digital signature signature.asc

Thread (74 messages)

« previous php.internals (#53134) next »