Re^3: DBI & CGI Security

I like the way you used encryption. I also often forget to lock the file when I only read it ;-)

This may be a silly question, and it doesn't mean to be ironic, but does encryption make a difference?
Indeed having a text file with the db auth on the server is only slightly better than having it in a script within the web server realm.
But, if you bear with me, if someone gets access to that file couldn't we assume that they also had access to the script? Also given that the key has to be included somewhere, how hard would it be to figure out the whole thing?
Should we encrypt the auth by default for the sake of good security practice?

jayrom

Comment on Re^3: DBI & CGI Security

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: DBI & CGI Security by bradcathey (Prior) on Jun 03, 2004 at 18:42 UTC
Points well taken jayroom. I agree, it's not a perfect set-up. The bottom line is that I doubt one can develop a completely ironclad system, as many discussions here at the Monastery will attest to. I think of security as a layered affair. I used to hard code my DB passwords right into the script, so, I'm doing one better here. I don't think there is any one silver bullet. The more barriers you put up, the harder you make it for the nefarious crackers to get in. Hopefully that is not too naive. I was thinking about my e-commerce sites, and combination of the secure certificate, the remote keys, and wondering if scenerios like that are workable. It's a good discussion to keep going—I'd love to see a definitive answer so I don't feel like the little boy sticking my fingers in the latest leak in the dike. —Brad "A little yeast leavens the whole dough."	[reply]
Re^5: DBI & CGI Security by jayrom (Pilgrim) on Jun 03, 2004 at 19:14 UTC
I didn't mean to give you a lesson. I also used to hard-code the auth in the script and have also wondered which solution would be the best. I share your overall feeling so I am in the same boat as you and would love to hear from one of the local gurus ;-) jayrom	[reply]