Re: Suhosin patch disabled by default in Debian php5 builds
| From: | marius adrian popa | Date: | Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:54:27 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Suhosin patch disabled by default in Debian php5 builds | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-57687@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Stefan Esser <stefan@nopiracy.de> wrote:
>
>> Grow up Pierre.
>
> here we go again... failed. next time....
>
>> See you do it again. You claim I believe EMET has been created because of Suhosin. I never
>> said that. Although one of the lead developers of EMET compared it himself to it.
>> You know some features of Suhosin are already in PHP and the HTTP response splitting drama
>> shows that when you break it there is a secondary layer of defense that protects you in case you use
>> Suhosin.
>
> I was talking about the compilation security options which are similar
> (in some extends) to what Suhosin does (for some features).
>
>> Pierre it is time for you to come out of the delusional state. You repeatedly claim that
>> everything is now superb.
>
> No, I said it is different and better than what you have experienced.
> And anyone active today in php.net can tell you the same.
>
>> Do you forget PHP 5.3.7 and PHP 5.3.9 both times there were security vulnerabilities
>> introduced right after the last RC.
>> This is a sign that the PHP development process is still not healthy at all.
>
> So any software having security issues at one point or another is not healthy?
>
> I consider the opposite, I am very careful when I see a software
> without any discovered issues for a long time, a sign of lack of
> activities and users.
>
>> You claim I have personal issues, while I repeatedly tell you the technical reasons why I
>> see it different then you.
>
> Sorry but I do not see technical issues in this thread, as in
> technical explanations about why one given feature is actually a good
> thing. I did not see any either in the past discussions.
>
I only say a few words and then i will be silent
I tend to agree with Linus on this one "Security people are insane"
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Pluggable_Security
If there is something that needs to be done so php core will be more
secure , make it in the core
Not words : write RFC(docs),patches with sane techincal disscussions
or a pluggable architecture with extensions and rules, something like
is done with LSM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Security_Modules
or mod_security in apache
I vote with the Debian point of view , less patches means faster
releases for php also it means more security
and they are using the vanilla core (less suoshin related bugs to support)
The goal is : 0 patches and use upstream as much as possible