MIT Bug Finder Uncovers Flaws In Web Apps In 64 Seconds (csoonline.com) 24
itwbennett quotes a report from CSO: A new tool from MIT exploits some of the idiosyncrasies in the Ruby on Rails programming framework to quickly uncover new ones, writes Katherine Noyes. In tests on 50 popular web applications written using Ruby on Rails, the system found 23 previously undiagnosed security flaws, and it took no more than 64 seconds to analyze any given program. Ruby on Rails is distinguished from other frameworks because it defines even its most basic operations in libraries. MIT's researchers took advantage of that fact by rewriting those libraries so that the operations defined in them describe their own behavior in a logical language.
Looks like Perls NYTProf (Score:1)
From what I can tell, it seems like it might be something like a code analysis tool that swapped in a logger to profile methods called along with some metadata (time spent in subroutine, etc).
http://open.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/05/the-new-york-times-perl-profiler/?_r=0
BUT ON AN APP!
or am i missing something?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It seems that you can read more about it here:
http://news.mit.edu/2016/patching-web-applications-0415
It mentions that it was done by professor Daniel Jackson and postdoc Joseph Near. Joseph Near seems to have page here:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jnear/
Under software you can find "Derailer" and "Rubicon" (but not "Space) and under theses you can find this PhD:
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/99841
A short overview of the three pieces of software is given on page 15
Re: (Score:1)
Hipsters like hipster languages developed by hipsters.. what a shock.. The rest of us with real work to do use proven tools.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah! GW-BASIC, man!
Re: (Score:1)
They jumped ship when the Ruby on Rails hype started really dying down
Good riddance. Rails is a cancer on the Ruby community.
seems obvious (Score:4, Funny)
the biggest flaw was that they were written in Ruby on Rails.
New Nicolas Cage movie (Score:1)
Gone in 64 seconds.
AFTER rewriting the libraries it took seconds! (Score:1)
how long did it take to rewrite the libraries?
The Ruby world... (Score:5, Insightful)
Many "cool and new" technologies started out with a rather dismissive and arrogant attitude towards predecessors — only to then encounter the same problems as other did before and have to solve them in a hurry, shooting yourself in the same extremity (with the same gun), and stepping on the same rake [123rf.com].
From my experience, Ruby is especially bad at it. Release 1.9.2 not quite compatible with 1.9.1? What?!
Published packages ("gems") not signed [rubygems.org]. Huh?
So, when I hear about yet another problem in that world, all I can do is shrug...
Re:Rust is the new Ruby. (Score:5, Funny)
Always the same. CSS today is solving the same layout problems that X11 window managers did 25 years ago.
And the CSS designers think this is ubercool.
One of them discovered "Atomic Design" a while ago. http://patternlab.io/about.htm... [patternlab.io]
This is a rediscovery of.....modularity! Yeah! Breaking up you work in modules! What a nifty idea!!!
Something that CS and Programming language design thoroughly explored in the 1960s and 70s but whatever.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow, I checked the link, and they indeed reinvented warm water !
We're probably getting too old for this shyte.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, but the difference is that they published it in a REAL BIG font, on a webpage that has all the text CENTERED, so that is wastes 90% of the realestate in the margins -- which it the totally hipster UX designer way of making websites.
ahh ruby (Score:2)
Python and Ruby are similar languages, and yet the cultures around the two are very different. A certain segment of Ruby has moved to node.js now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]