openstack team mailing list archive

[Stanislav Pugachev <spugachev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Why do you think code will become more fragile? It will be more defended.
How $PATH checking will help if someone will change the binary?
And it is not so much work to do here.


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Victor Lowther <victor.lowther@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Err, sounds like a lot of work to make the code more fragile.  If you want
> to be paranoid about launching the right command, do it by sanity-checking
> $PATH, not by hardcoding the path of all the executables you call.
>
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Stanislav Pugachev <
> spugachev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I've added a blueprint
>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/hacking/+spec/absolute-paths-of-os-binaries
>> Please, take a look and let's discuss it if it makes sense.
>> Thank you
>> Stas.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>