Heh - actually, I'd be willing to change my 'e.g.' to an 'i.e.'. Whilst bugs are a part of life, allowing a script to accept 3 params, but only testing with 2 prior to disabling taint would be, well, pretty dumb.

And face it, anyone dumb enough to do that will probably have screwed up cleaning the user input anyway...

What's pretty dumb is to assume you can write perfect tests.

Abigail

True, but then, as I said, we're still screwed since taint doesn't force you to get the cleaning right

Look, it's a moot point (who the hell turns off taint checking?), but a valid one. Turning off taint checking on a production script shouldn't make any difference

Consider - you develop a script, and when you test with taint on, the following generates a warning:

foreach(@ARGV){
  `$_`;
}
[download]

So you correct it:

foreach(@ARGV){
  /(\w*)/;
  $foo = `ls -l $1`;
}
[download]

Is this going to be any less secure for running without taint once you've got it to run with taint?

foreach(@ARGV){
  /(.*)/;
  $foo = `$1`;
}
[download]

and is this going to be any less insecure for running with taint?
Tom Melly, tom@tomandlu.co.uk