Programming: C, Grantlee and Python Package Index (PyPI)

-
Packaging and the Security Proposition
Why does C need “securing”
C as a language is unsafe in every meaning of the word. The best C programmers on the planet are incapable of writing a secure program. This is because to code in C you have to express a concurrent problem, into a language that is linearised, which is compiled relying on undefined behaviour, to be executed on an asynchronous concurrent out of order CPU. What could possibly go wrong?!
There is a lot you need to hold in mind to make C work. I can tell you now that I spend a majority of my development time thinking about the code to change rather than writing C because of this!
This has led to C based applications having just about every security issue known to man.
How is C “secured”
So as C is security swiss cheese, this means we have developed processes around the language to soften this issue - for example advice like patch and update continually as new changes are continually released to resolve issues.
Distribution packages have always been the “source” of updates for these libraries and applications. These packages are maintained by humans who need to update these packages. This means when a C project releases a fix, these maintainers would apply the patch to various versions, and then release the updates. These library updates due to C’s dynamic nature means when the machine is next rebooted (yes rebooted, not application restarted) that these fixes apply to all consumers who have linked to that library - change one, fix everything. Great!
But there are some (glaring) weaknesses to this model. C historically has little to poor application testing so many of these patches and their effects can’t be reproduced. Which also subsequently means that consuming applications also aren’t re-tested adequately. It can also have impacts where a change to a shared library can impact a consuming application in a way that was unforseen as the library changed.
-
Grantlee version 5.2 (Alles hat ein Ende, nur die Wurst hat zwei) now available
The Grantlee community is pleased to announce the release of Grantlee version 5.2.0.
For the benefit of the uninitiated, Grantlee is a set of Qt based libraries including an advanced string template system in the style of the Django template system.
-
Working toward securing PyPI downloads
An effort to protect package downloads from the Python Package Index (PyPI) has resulted in a Python Enhancement Proposal (PEP) and, perhaps belatedly, some discussion in the wider community. The basic idea is to use The Update Framework (TUF) to protect PyPI users from some malicious actors who are aiming to interfere with the installation and update of Python modules. But the name of the PEP and its wording, coupled with some recent typosquatting problems on PyPI, caused some confusion along the way. There are some competing interests and different cultures coming together over this PEP; the process has not run as smoothly as anyone might want, though that seems to be resolving itself at this point.
PEP 458 ("Surviving a Compromise of PyPI") has been around since 2013 or so; LWN looked at the PEP and the related PEP 480 ("Surviving a Compromise of PyPI: The Maximum Security Model") in 2015. PEP 458 proposes a mechanism to provide cryptographic-signature protection for PyPI packages using TUF. No changes would be required for package authors or those downloading the packages, but client-side programs like pip would be able to ensure that they are getting the latest version of the code—and that the code itself is what is stored on PyPI.
A message was posted to the Python discussion forum in mid-November about the PEP. One of the PEP's authors, Trishank Kuppusamy, wondered about the status of it, but the message mostly seemed to be aimed at Donald Stufft, who is the "BDFL-Delegate" for the PEP. That means that the steering council has deferred the decision on the PEP to Stufft; a week or so later, he had seemingly replied to the request but via some other channel.
Neither message was a general call for discussion of the PEP, however, which might be expected, so it would seem that many may have skipped over the message entirely. In early December, Guido van Rossum noted in the thread that he had merged a pull request (PR) for a bunch of updates to the PEP, but cautioned that discussion of the PEP should be done on the forum rather than in a PR. That is the normal course of action on a PEP; clearly Van Rossum was a bit surprised that it wasn't being followed in this case.
-

- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- 2062 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
digiKam 7.7.0 is released
After three months of active maintenance and another bug triage, the digiKam team is proud to present version 7.7.0 of its open source digital photo manager. See below the list of most important features coming with this release.
|
Dilution and Misuse of the "Linux" Brand
|
Samsung, Red Hat to Work on Linux Drivers for Future Tech
The metaverse is expected to uproot system design as we know it, and Samsung is one of many hardware vendors re-imagining data center infrastructure in preparation for a parallel 3D world.
Samsung is working on new memory technologies that provide faster bandwidth inside hardware for data to travel between CPUs, storage and other computing resources. The company also announced it was partnering with Red Hat to ensure these technologies have Linux compatibility.
|
today's howtos
|








.svg_.png)
Content (where original) is available under CC-BY-SA, copyrighted by original author/s.

Recent comments
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago
1 year 11 weeks ago