Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:26993 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96015 invoked by uid 1010); 15 Dec 2006 23:12:08 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96000 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2006 23:12:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Dec 2006 23:12:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=stas@zend.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=stas@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.162 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: stas@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.25.124.162 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [212.25.124.162] ([212.25.124.162:8301] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E6/E2-10210-3AB23854 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:12:07 -0500 Received: (qmail 28510 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2006 23:09:59 -0000 Received: from office.zend.office (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (192.168.16.109) by internal.zend.office with SMTP; 15 Dec 2006 23:09:59 -0000 Message-ID: <45832B9B.2080109@zend.com> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:11:23 -0800 Organization: Zend Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ilia Alshanetsky CC: Wietse Venema , PHP internals References: <20061215201448.B16D8BC1AB@spike.porcupine.org> <7AE00699-23C2-4759-A50C-3D94199DA85A@prohost.org> <45831090.1000704@zend.com> <18A7CF93-7BFD-4764-847D-6C107A62875E@prohost.org> <45831A87.6050301@zend.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Run-time taint support proposal From: stas@zend.com (Stanislav Malyshev) > All it means is extra work for developers with little or no tangible > benefits. I also wonder how taint will work with the standard remove/add Security is benefit. Of course, the developers that are sure they write secure code anyway need not be bothered by tainting and can leave it off forever. > The job of a language is to provide tools, not arbitrary crippling > limitation under the guise of security improvement. I agree. Tainting is one of such tools, aimed at improving security. > safe_mode sounded like a really reasonable idea too, I would've hoped > some lessons from past mistakes could be made. I do not see what exactly you propose to learn from safe mode mistakes - that we should never try to improve PHP security by providing language level tools? I do not see how this can be derived from whatever was wrong with safe mode. It may be that the tainting would not catch but I do not think safe mode problems should prevent us from even trying. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/