<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PHPDeveloper.org</title>
    <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org</link>
    <description>Up-to-the Minute PHP News, views and community</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 20:33:15 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Dan Scott's Blog: The state of PHP security (LWN article)]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6985</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6985</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
In a <a href="http://www.coffeecode.net/archives/110-The-state-of-PHP-security-LWN-article.html">new post to his blog</a> today, <i>Dan Scott</i> points out <a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/215123">an article</a> over on the Linux Weekly website talking about the current state of PHP security.
</p>
<blockquote>
I was hoping for some provocative thoughts about the direction that PHP has been taking for the last six months or so in the arena of security. Unfortunately, I was greatly disappointed. Beyond using Stefan's departure as a kicking-off point for the article, the author didn't even mention any of these issues (taint, ext/filter, etc).
</blockquote>
<p>
Instead, <a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/215123">the article</a> swerves back into the old rut of register_globals and magic_quotes. <i>Dan</i> also expresses concern at a possible misquote from <i>Rasmus Lerdorf</i> and that, had the author done a bit more homework, they wouldn't have made comments (in reference to the above mentioned features) like:
</p>
<blockquote>
Security is a hard problem and any attempt to 'dumb down' a language is likely to run into security issues. [...] A great deal of useful code has been written on the PHP platform; it would be nice to find a way to keep that code coming while simultaneously making it more secure.
</blockquote>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2006 10:34:00 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
