lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 13:31:09 -0800
From: "Jim Harrison" <>
To: <>
Subject: RE: PHP as a secure language? PHP worms? [was: Re: new linux malware]

<Peeve type="pet">
"They" (developers) and "it" (the secure language) are both moving
There is no "genetic memory" with the human race; any more than there is
an "inherently secure" language.  For every developer that learns how to
write "secure code", at least one more starts cutting his/her teeth in
the same language; possibly for the same reasons.  Anyone who insists
that there either exists a "secure language" or that the problem of
"secure code" can be "completely solved" is IMHO, severely deluded.
Neither will ever be even remotely true.
</Peeve type="pet">

If you have issue with someone's code habits, address it with them
first.  This is part & parcel to the "education" process.  If this fails
because of their unwillingness or inability to adjust, then you've done
what you can.  If this unresolved problem presents a public disservice,
then you report it.  Public opinion is a powerful motivator.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tino Wildenhain [] 
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 1:00 PM
To: Bill Nash
Cc: Kevin Waterson;
Subject: Re: PHP as a secure language? PHP worms? [was: Re: new linux

Bill Nash schrieb:
> 	*ANY* language implemented for *ANY* purpose is as secure as the

> programmer makes it. The way the original post is written, 
> s/PHP/(Perl|ASP|C|bash|BASIC|four little buddhist monks fighting over 
> an abacus)/ is applicable. The vulnerabilities that we see, that Gadi 
> refers to, aren't widespread because PHP is widespread, but because 
> insecure applications written in PHP are. A better use of energy would

> be focusing on the most vulnerable platforms and educating the

But aparently they aren't educatable - hence they stick to this
language. (Because of the many bad examples they can cut&paste code


All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists