A Developers Security Bugs Primer 35
CowboyRobot writes "ACM Queue's current issue on Open Source Security includes a short article by Eric Allman of Sendmail on how to handle security bugs in your code.
"Patch with full disclosure. Particularly popular in the open source world (where releasing a patch is tantamount to full disclosure anyway), this involves opening the kimono and exposing everything, including a detailed description of the problem and how the exploit works... Generally speaking, it is easier to find bugs in open source code, and hence the pressure to release quickly may be higher.""
Opening the kimono and exposing everything (Score:5, Funny)
Priority... (Score:4, Insightful)
We recently (1 month ago) had a form in an easily accessible place vulnerable to SQL Injection due to a failure to validate ANY of the data passed to it. This job was only just patched this past week (and all updates have been run). This time frame, as far as I am concerned, is entirely unacceptable for a job that was so easy to fix yet so dangerous to our business.
On disclosure: Add it to the release notes. If you roll out a patch for one problem, then the problem will be described in the release notes. If the release is internal then the problem will (SHOULD) also be documented in the testing plan and proceedure.
My $0.02.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Parsing is messy business and there's usually ways to thwart it by a determined h4x0r.
Re: (Score:1)
Short sighted. (Score:3, Funny)
Next time take into consideration those who choose to wear sweatpants, moo-moos, and the increasingly popular among furries peanut butter suit + placard.
Re: (Score:1)
Missing apostrophe (Score:2)
Shouldn't that be "A Developer's Security Bugs Primer"?
This site has editors, right?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Yes, such as "primer". "A (Developers' (Security Bugs) Primer)" is a valid way of describing a primer for developers regarding security bugs.
Sendmail? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It could be worse; it could be advice on how to write readable code from the person who wrote qmail.
+tag irony (Score:1, Flamebait)
It's not the bugs (Score:3, Informative)
But here's a bit of irony: the ACMQueue article would seem to indicate that Allman believes in transparency. OK, the sendmail security page lives at:
http://www.sendmail.com/security/ [sendmail.com]
But you have to know that, find it via Google, or just guess. When the page loads, you'll find a pagetop navigation bug at the Resources secion. But pull open the Resources section, and you find no link to it. Nor will you see it from the site map.
My overall take is that if you already know the ins and outs of sendmail admin (and other bits that it may be talking to, such as LDAP) you're running software which carries no greater than mainstream risk.
That said--this is complex software, and complexity is the enemy of security. If you're planning a new installation (particularly a small installation), and don't need all of sendmail's features, you should consider possible alternatives offerred by your Unix/Linux vendor.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Those Lucky A Developers! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Please punctuate appropriate with 5th grade (Score:1, Redundant)
Developers = more than one developer.
Developer's = the term following belongs to the developer.
Developers' = the term following belongs to more than one developer
We are supposed to learn this in 5th grade.
It is embarrassing that grown men, employed by the most prominent IT website, will publish an article where the title would fail 5th grade English.
If we are to hold ourselves to a higher technical standard, we should at least be able to spell an