Re: ls bug.

["Crist J. Clark" <crist.clark () attbi com>]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 04:04:34PM +0200, Ehud Tenenbaum wrote:
> Hey again...
>
> Well no point to flame someone for making a mistake
> no big deal we are sorry for posting this ls bug which is not a bug.

Yes. There is a point. If you are not sure you have a security bug,
feel free to post questions about _potential_ issues on this list; it
is within the charter. Someone who asks, "Hey, is this a bug? Why does
this happen?" would get much nicer treatment than a "Security Team"
that makes an announcement about security bugs they have found when they
really just don't have a basic understanding of how shell expansions
work.

The signal-to-noise ration out there is already low enough. The
security community does not need people posting bogus alerts whenever
someone sees behavior they do not understand.

> Petrus : 2 ways to delete -ls ? well here is one rm -rf /full/path/-ls
> second one
>         rm -rf ./-ls  :P

Or,

  rm -- -ls

This is handy for your "bug." You can do,

  ls -- *

And not worry about what flags '*' may expand to. 
-- 
Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclark () alum mit edu
                                   |     cjclark () jhu edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjc () freebsd org