5 ms·

And yet another interesting GNU tar "feature", also noteworthy is remote tar: https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/tar_46.html#remote_002ddev h

by brynet 11y ago

And yet another interesting GNU tar "feature", also noteworthy is remote tar: https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/tar_46.html#remote_002ddev https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/tar_46.... > "If the archive file name includes a colon (`:'), then it is assumed to be a file on another machine. If the archive file is `user@host:file', then file is used on the host host. The remote host is accessed using [rsh]." and > "If you need to use a file whose name includes a colon, then the remote tape drive behavior can be inhibited by using the `--force-local' option." On many systems, rsh is aliased to ssh, so if you don't properly sanitize your archive names, GNU tar will make network connections.

im3w1l 11y ago
Wow... I'm starting to get really scared of the shell, and how much hidden complexity there is waiting to trap the unwary. Feels like best practice for shellscripts is to only ever use them for one-offs. And that tar and friends should never be used as "helpers" by other programs.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Welcome to life.
  - im3w1l 11y ago
    What you are, rudely, implying is that what I am saying is already well known. I'd argue that isn't so. Until recently shell-scripts was the way you inited a system. I still have almost 2000 shell scripts on my machine that I didn't write myself. People got owned during shellshock, which means they did run helper programs, in web-facing applications even.
    - digi_owl 11y ago
      No, life is stuffed full of hidden complexities. Complexities that are ready to bite the hand of the unwary at the slightest of chances. Honesty i think the biggest lie in modern times is the MS/Apple lie that computing can be made so simple that even the proverbial aunt Tillie can do it without reading any sort of manual.
jordan0day 11y ago
It's amazing how many programs that most people would consider "core unix utilities" totally eschew the (alleged) unix philosophy of "do one thing well."
- nitrogen 11y ago
  That's probably a GNU thing. GNU's Not Unix, after all.
  - brynet 11y ago
    None of the BSD tar implementations support remote tar.
  - jordan0day 11y ago
    touché

by brynet 11y ago

im3w1l 11y ago

Wow... I'm starting to get really scared of the shell, and how much hidden complexity there is waiting to trap the unwary. Feels like best practice for shellscripts is to only ever use them for one-offs. And that tar and friends should never be used as "helpers" by other programs.

digi_owl 11y ago
Welcome to life.
- im3w1l 11y ago
  What you are, rudely, implying is that what I am saying is already well known. I'd argue that isn't so. Until recently shell-scripts was the way you inited a system. I still have almost 2000 shell scripts on my machine that I didn't write myself. People got owned during shellshock, which means they did run helper programs, in web-facing applications even.
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    No, life is stuffed full of hidden complexities. Complexities that are ready to bite the hand of the unwary at the slightest of chances. Honesty i think the biggest lie in modern times is the MS/Apple lie that computing can be made so simple that even the proverbial aunt Tillie can do it without reading any sort of manual.

jordan0day 11y ago

It's amazing how many programs that most people would consider "core unix utilities" totally eschew the (alleged) unix philosophy of "do one thing well."

nitrogen 11y ago
That's probably a GNU thing. GNU's Not Unix, after all.
- brynet 11y ago
  None of the BSD tar implementations support remote tar.
- jordan0day 11y ago
  touché