Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52957 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 50995 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2011 19:19:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Jun 2011 19:19:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.143 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.143 smtp143.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.143] ([67.192.241.143:48689] helo=smtp143.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F9/DA-26000-DB6DBED4 for ; Sun, 05 Jun 2011 15:19:26 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp14.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 6AD8C29A7A7; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 15:19:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp14.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id D563129A7A0; Sun, 5 Jun 2011 15:19:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4DEBD6B9.9060103@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 12:19:21 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Felipe Pena CC: Pierre Joye , PHP Internals References: <4DEB3D65.107@sugarcrm.com> <4DEBD46E.3070708@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] bug #39863 in trunk/5.4 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > Of course, I was just checking if it's what you guys are thinking first. Well, there was basically two ideas: 1. Add filename length to streams and check inside streams 2. Check inside argument parser Both have downsides: (1) does not capture cases when we don't use streams (such as direct stat/touch/etc functions), (2) doesn't cover the case when stream is manipulated through a string not coming directly from a function argument (e.g. include, but may be other cases with extensions). So, ideally, it'd be nice to have both - or something third that I didn't think of - but any of them is better than nothing. (1) seems to be easier and less disruptive, provided that we cover include case separately and locate all functions that deal with filenames. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227