Re: INPUT
| From: | Jochem Maas | Date: | Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:01:14 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: INPUT | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-240503@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Thu, August 10, 2006 1:54 pm, Jochem Maas wrote:
>> Warren Vail wrote:
>>> Many of the older PHP implementations don't have the
>>> mysql_escape_string
>>> function, if not addslashes should work....
>> this is true.
>>
>>> I would be interested to know
>>> what might get past the addslashes function that the
>>> mysql_escape_string
>>> function catches.
>> not sure about that but one assumes MySQL is better equipped to know
>> how to properly/safely escape data - besides
>> mysql_real_escape_string()
>> is character set aware. on top of this you don't know what the future
>> will bring
>> mysql(_real)_escape_string() is better in terms of future proofing.
>>
>> if anyone answer Warren's question I would be interested to read about
>> it too :-)
>
> As I understand it, the only known issues are, in fact, with
> non-Latin1 character sets not being escaped properly, and leaving a
> big fat security door unlocked because of it.
>
> There is a theoretical possibility that something in Latin1 +
> addslashes is still hinky, but it seems unlikely at this point in
> time, after most of a decade of hacking...
>
> This is NOT an endorsement of "sticking with" addslashes because you
> are "sure" you'll never need anything more than Latin1 !!!
>
> You *should* switch, even if only for the theoretical risk-reduction.
>
> And because you only THINK you won't need more than Latin1, and you're
> wrong. :-)
beautifully put as as always :-)
>