From: James Britt <jamesUNDERBARb@...>
Date: 2004-08-13T13:09:59+09:00
Subject: Re: RubyForge project and gem distriubtion

David Ross wrote:

> Heres food for thought..
> 
> What stops someone who has a registered project on
> RubyForge to abuse Gems? A constructive criticism in
> major design flaw. This is why a central repository
> where there is a QA team is good. They can look at
> code.
> 
> `rm -rf /` :)
> 

Possible, perhaps.  Maybe in unit test code.  I believe that the code 
you are installing, though, is not what is executed by the installation 
process.

But that was why I had wondered, here on ruby-talk a little while ago, 
if there might be a way to have a potential installation screened by 
some sort of "sanity check" code, something that checks for possibly 
troublesome code.

Any code you install, however you do it, might have "issues."  This is 
not specific to gems.  I believe that this is bigger issue with 
home-grown install.rb scripts; using gems should make things less risky, 
as the mere installation shouldn't cause damage.

Presumably, you don't install something unless you trust the source.

How would one know that some central repository hadn't been hacked?

Either way, you need to pay attention and not assume that someone else 
is looking out for your best interests.  Might be better not to fall 
into the habit of thinking that code has already been vetted.

I don't see this as a major design flaw.  I tend to think that reliance 
on a third-party to always do the right thing is a design flaw.


James