[#955] Ruby 1.4.3 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Ruby 1.4.3 is out, check out:
1 message
1999/12/07
[#961] Ruby compileable by C++ compiler? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Hi,
8 messages
1999/12/10
[#962] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#963] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
1999/12/10
Wei,
[#964] Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Hi,
15 messages
1999/12/10
[#966] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— nakajima kengo<ringo@...>
1999/12/10
Hello Clemens,
[#967] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#989] a question about to_i — Friedrich Dominicus <Friedrich.Dominicus@...>
Sorry, I'm quite new to ruby. But I encounterd the following problem. If
17 messages
1999/12/19
[ruby-talk:00988] Re: -T2 and require
From:
matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date:
1999-12-18 14:51:35 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #988
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:00987] Re: -T2 and require"
on 99/12/18, ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:
|Y> If the path contains the relative path, security check should have
|Y> done by its absolute path. I fixed them at my copy of Ruby 1.5.0.
|Y> After checking it for a while, the fix will be merged into 1.4.4.
|
| Sorry if my previous message was not clear (I've a very bad english), but
| there are 2 problems :
Your English is far better than mine anyway.
| 1) security check on the absolute path
| 2) security check on the last component. For example actually I've in
| hash.c
I had fixed former point only. I was misunderstanding my code.
| for (;;) {
| int safe;
|
| if (pend) *pend = '\0';
| safe = path_check_1(p);
| if (!pend) break;
| *pend = sep;
| if (!safe) {
| return 0;
| }
| p = pend + 1;
| pend = strchr(p, sep);
| }
| return 1;
Moving
| if (!safe) {
| return 0;
| }
right after
| safe = path_check_1(p);
will fix the latter problem. This too will be in 1.5.0 on next Monday.
matz.