[Python-Dev] Critical bash vulnerability CVE-2014-6271 may affect Python on nx and OSX (original) (raw)
Xavier Morel catch-all at masklinn.net
Sat Sep 27 09:23:55 CEST 2014
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Critical bash vulnerability CVE-2014-6271 may affect Python on *n*x and OSX
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Critical bash vulnerability CVE-2014-6271 may affect Python on *n*x and OSX
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 2014-09-27, at 00:11 , Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> wrote:
On 26Sep2014 13:16, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 01:10:53 -0700 Hasan Diwan <hasan.diwan at gmail.com> wrote:
On 26 September 2014 00:28, Matěj Cepl <mcepl at cepl.eu> wrote: > Where does your faith that other /bin/sh implementations (dash, > busybox, etc.) are less buggy comes from?
The fact that they are simpler, in terms of lines of code. It's no guarantee, but the less a given piece of code does, the less bugs it will have. -- H And that they have less "features" (which is certainly correlated to their simplicity). IIUC, the misimplemented feature leading to this vulnerability is a bash-ism. IIRC you could export functions in ksh. Or maybe only aliases. But that implies most POSIX shells may support it.
From my understanding KSH's function export is so a function becomes available in the caller of a script e.g. if you define a function in your .kshrc it's internal to the file (and won't be available in the interactive shell) unless you export it: http://users.speakeasy.net/~arkay/216-7.4KshFunctions.html
KSH (and ZSH) will also load functions from files on $FPATH, but AFAIK that's it.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Critical bash vulnerability CVE-2014-6271 may affect Python on *n*x and OSX
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Critical bash vulnerability CVE-2014-6271 may affect Python on *n*x and OSX
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]