Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82488
Return-Path: <php@bof.de>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 59476 invoked from network); 11 Feb 2015 18:41:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 11 Feb 2015 18:41:55 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@bof.de; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@bof.de; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain bof.de designates 80.242.145.70 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@bof.de
X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.242.145.70 mars.intermailgate.com  
Received: from [80.242.145.70] ([80.242.145.70:43535] helo=mars.intermailgate.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id A9/61-51722-172ABD45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 13:41:54 -0500
Received: (qmail 30491 invoked by uid 1009); 11 Feb 2015 19:41:49 +0100
Received: from 209.85.216.177 by mars (envelope-from <php@bof.de>, uid 89) with qmail-scanner-1.25-st-qms 
 (clamdscan: 0.96.2/20054. spamassassin: 3.3.1. perlscan: 1.25-st-qms.  
 Clear:RC:1(209.85.216.177):. 
 Processed in 0.277497 secs); 11 Feb 2015 18:41:49 -0000
X-Antivirus-MYDOMAIN-Mail-From: php@bof.de via mars
X-Antivirus-MYDOMAIN: 1.25-st-qms (Clear:RC:1(209.85.216.177):. Processed in 0.277497 secs Process 30483)
Received: from mail-qc0-f177.google.com (gmail@bof.de@209.85.216.177)
  by mars.intermailgate.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 11 Feb 2015 19:41:49 +0100
Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id s11so4524134qcv.8
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:41:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.96.196 with SMTP id i4mr76574qan.44.1423680107559; Wed,
 11 Feb 2015 10:41:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.140.104.65 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:41:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.140.104.65 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:41:47 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <54DB9DA4.2030709@gmail.com>
References: <CAGa2bXZsANJz_RvsBvC9yBhac+ukHYUngA=GjLOgcqTTPbpGhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<54DB0575.8020506@gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXY1XQa3JbQG1EK2aXtHN_7QL64WPJQhBWn5=ZCVYrX5Hw@mail.gmail.com>
	<54DB9DA4.2030709@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:41:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ26g5RHdXA+nTS4XTdZJo__UDFW2TBVZ8aaB3-fdwcr6jfVDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3601c15c274050ed45b9a
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] Script only includes
From: php@bof.de (Patrick Schaaf)

--001a11c3601c15c274050ed45b9a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,

another one of my weird ideas: what about a script signing mode?

- ini setting containing a HMAC key
- first <?php tag in a file must then have a signature, a la
<?php:Base64encodedstring
- no parsing of files that fail the signature check
- (maybe optional) disabling of eval

Of course such an approach would need, in addition, a locally well defined
place from where updated code is distributed to production servers, which
would then need to implement the signing process. So it's only something
for sane larger shops with a good dev/production split.

best regards
  Patrick

--001a11c3601c15c274050ed45b9a--