in reply to Re^8: Can't use an undefined value as a HASH reference
in thread Can't use an undefined value as a HASH reference

And now you have strayed so far from where this started it would be meaningless to continue to respond to you.

Nothing in the OP suggests that he is dealing with data received from untrusted sources. NOTHING!

And everything you have said that is founded upon that premise is meaningless in the context of the OP and my response.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!
  • Comment on Re^9: Can't use an undefined value as a HASH reference

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: Can't use an undefined value as a HASH reference
by Monk::Thomas (Friar) on Aug 26, 2015 at 19:09 UTC

    I find it quite strange how you reply to something that is not part of my postings. I did not use or cite the word untrusted anywhere in this thread. In the posting you replied to I was specifically talking about and referring to handling invalid input. And the OP did indeed have a problem with the input that was provided -> Re^4: Can't use an undefined value as a HASH reference.

    So basically we're still OnTopic: The code does not handle the provided input very well and fails to properly react to it. As a solution one could choose to either be more lenient in what to accept or one could verify the input more closely and refuse to process it. Both have their merits and they have been discussed extensively now.

    (Addendum: I did refer to attackers, but in this case Anonymous was accidentally both Attacker and Target.)
[reply]
      I find it quite strange how you reply to something that is not part of my postings. I did not use or cite the word untrusted anywhere in this thread.

      True, and yet still balderdash! I quote: Adversaries deliberately exploit corner cases.". You trust your "adversaries"?

      You're still trying to win an argument that you lost with your first strawman; now give it up already. Cos I'm done with you.

      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
      I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom