First, this is like saying C takes care of buffer overflows:
1) buffer overflow - programmer - count
Conservatively, that action item cost the industry over 5 billion dollars. So, generally, "bad programming: use good programming" is not an effective answer to security.
Second:
(3) Fails on complex queries and query builders all the time; there are situations where you can't parameterize everthing that varies in a query.
(5) Would have precluded Github, which used `` expansion in its first revs to invoke git.
(8) First, Rails isn't single-threaded anymore, and second, you can end up with race conditions at the database layer if you aren't careful with transactions and isolation levels.
(9) Is only true if you not using any unaudited C extensions; quick, tell me how many of the gems you brought in have an ext/ directory with code in it?
Comments
First, this is like saying C takes care of buffer overflows:
1) buffer overflow - programmer - count
Conservatively, that action item cost the industry over 5 billion dollars. So, generally, "bad programming: use good programming" is not an effective answer to security.
Second:
(3) Fails on complex queries and query builders all the time; there are situations where you can't parameterize everthing that varies in a query.
(5) Would have precluded Github, which used `` expansion in its first revs to invoke git.
(8) First, Rails isn't single-threaded anymore, and second, you can end up with race conditions at the database layer if you aren't careful with transactions and isolation levels.
(9) Is only true if you not using any unaudited C extensions; quick, tell me how many of the gems you brought in have an ext/ directory with code in it?
3) Have you tried named_scope? It solves most of the query building pain for me...