I was monitoring the group mail for a while a year or 
two ago, and kept intending to go to meetings since some
of them were in Newton, where I used to work, but I
never got around to it.

Now I work in Sudbury and the meetings are in Boston,
so getting to them would be even harder.  Nevertheless,
I could try again.

I haven't seen any meetings announced yet (or even much
traffic on this mail list) since I signed up to start receiving
it again a few days ago.  Is the group less active than it
was previously, what with the dot com implosion?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Lussier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark Aisenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] Safe execution of 1 perl prog from another? 


> 
> In a message dated: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 15:34:20 EDT
> "Mark Aisenberg" said:
> 
> >Generally speaking, opening a powerful (root) program
> >to the internet via CGI is dangerous.
> 
> I understand that.  However, this is not meant to be done via the 
> internet at large, rather it's a syadmin tool meant to be used 
> locally in a (relatively speaking) secure environment.  The web 
> server in question should never be connected to or reachable from
> the internet in any way, shape, or form.
> 
> >For info on CGI security, see:
> >http://www.panix.com/~comdog/CGI_MetaFAQ.html
> >http://www.w3.org/Security/Faq/wwwsf4.html
> >and other sources you can find with Google.
> 
> Ah, good, thanks for the references!
> 
> >If you're not an experienced CGI programmer, you might
> >reconsider what you are doing and instead use remote
> >control software to continue to run your command line
> >program, but remotely.
> 
> I wouldn't consider myself an expert CGI programmer.  I've written a 
> few CGI based widgets, but nothing which ever required any amount of 
> security.
> 
> I personally have no problem running the command line program.  As 
> for remote control software, all I need is ssh :)
> 
> The reason for the CGI wrapper is so others who don't want to have to 
> remember all the various options (and there are a lot) the command 
> line tool can use don't have to.  Instead, they can use a form-based 
> input which runs the command with the appropriate command line 
> options.
> 
> >* web server breaches (IIS or Apache, e.g.)
> >* tainted user input
> >* people pretending to be authorized users
> >* info leakage from valid use to the outside world, where
> >  it is picked up and used by bad guys
> 
> In theory, (and I understand this all hinges on the assumption that 
> the code I write is used as I intend it to be :) this CGI will never, 
> ever be accessible to or from the internet.  The server is intended 
> to be internal to a LAN, and accessed only by a small group of Unix 
> sysadmins.  So, again, in theory, any maliciousness would have to 
> come from the inside.  So, in that way, I'm hoping to mitigate the 
> amount of damage that can be done.
> 
> 
> >I've been writing CGI programs for 3 or 4 years now, and
> >typically the amount of code required for security and user
> >interface exceeds that of the core program function.  I've
> >written custom modules for my own use to handle things
> >like session management (using whatever combination of
> >partial ip address, cookie data, and session ids I stick
> >in URLs and propagate from page to page), so I know
> >that the person using a form is the person who just logged in.
> >You have to plan to spend a few weeks learning and 
> >implementing security code before you should feel reasonably
> >safe.
> 
> I'm willing to do that, since this code is completely my own, and 
> eventually will be GPL'ed (once I'm confident enough that it's worthy 
> of release into the wild :)  So, time isn't really an issue, and I'm 
> quite interested in learning more about secure programming methodes.
> 
> >Again, remote control software?  AT&T has a free one
> >at http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/start.html
> 
> No, I don't really think VNC would solve the problem.  SSH is already 
> available, everyone has a Linux box and knows how to use SSH, they're 
> just lazy and don't want to remember a bunch of command line options :)
> 
> >If you're still interested, maybe we could discuss it at a
> >technical meeting of some sort (I've been planning to start
> >attending for a couple of years now...)
> 
> That would be great!  The last meeting I attended was before the 
> group was officially the Boston Perl Mongers, Mike Stok still lived 
> in the area, and a bunch of us got together at the Commonwealth 
> Brewery (I think it's now Boston Beer and Fish?) for drinks.
> 
> The only other person I remember being there was Lincoln Stein.
> 
> So yeah, I'd be up for attending a meeting :)
> -- 
> 
> Seeya,
> Paul
> ----
> 
>   God Bless America!
> 
> ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around,
> and we never stop trying to be better. 
>        Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to