• BB_C@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    No. It’s “don’t mix URI parses”.

    Or if you want to be more specific, it’s “make sure security-sensitive paths are maximally specified, safely constructed, and maximally typed all the way”.

    A combination of file:// URLs being under-specified, and a C library (and not any C library, but glib, a special level of shit) predictably offering crap interface and contract guarantees (and hidden bugs to boot, yay).

    This reaching attempt for some shallow generic common wisdom explanation actually reminds me of my first ever Lemmy discussion, where URLs were also incidentally involved.

    • chrysn@chaos.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The very same type of mistakes happens in file systems even without URIs being involved. Directory traversal checks look simple but sooner or later need hard-to-understand symlink following rules. Enforcing processor policy has terrible portability there (it even only became practical on Linux with landlock), but nonetheless I think it’s preferable.
      Not mixing URI parsers is a good advice for when processor policies are unavailable – but let’s try to make them available more often.