This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author paul.moore
Recipients Alexander Riccio, brett.cannon, paul.moore, steve.dower, tim.golden, zach.ware
Date 2016-06-30.16:20:42
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1467303643.06.0.12168461001.issue26137@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
>> I am puzzled as to why "use safe_exec rather than exec" isn't an option

> Because you're going to have a hard time convincing malware authors to use it.

:-) So the malicious payload is the whole python command, not just file.bin. OK, fair enough. But in that case, why hook into exec? The malware author can execute arbitrary Python so doesn't *need* exec.

As I say, though, I'm not an expert in security threats, so I'm OK with accepting that there's a hole here and the proposal plugs it.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-06-30 16:20:43paul.mooresetrecipients: + paul.moore, brett.cannon, tim.golden, zach.ware, steve.dower, Alexander Riccio
2016-06-30 16:20:43paul.mooresetmessageid: <1467303643.06.0.12168461001.issue26137@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-06-30 16:20:43paul.moorelinkissue26137 messages
2016-06-30 16:20:42paul.moorecreate