I'm working on a module which will allow end users to upload files and I realized there is a security risk. For instance, a user could upload a malicious PHP script to perform nasty stuff on the server. My solution to this is to allow the administrator to enter a list of file extensions to allow, or enter a list of file extensions to block.
I'd like to know what the other module developers think is the best way to go, and get a feel for what users would prefer.
Thanks!
- mdee responded to »Different page content under one template (tpl file) based on URL« 07:17 AM
- Guite responded to »Remove contents of nuke_sc_anticracker from Database« 01:30 AM
- espaan responded to »Categories disappear when editing ...« 08. Feb
- eledril responded to »How decrease zikula cpu usage« 08. Feb
- jmvaughn responded to »PN 0.764 to Zikula 1.1.2 (migration) Internal Server Error« 08. Feb
- eledril created topic »Where can I download BBCode and BBSmile?« 08. Feb
- Paustian responded to »Need Feedback« 08. Feb
Zikula Blog
- Anatomy of Open Source Projects on Mar 07
- Continuous Review on Mar 01
- Not Invented Here on Feb 24
- How to Contribute Your Code at Github on Jan 13
- 10 Steps to Coding-Nirvana: Tips for Successful Module Writing on Nov 12
- Submitting Bug Report Tickets That Get Results on Aug 17
- Cozi Tricks #1: Syntax Highlighting on Aug 07
Login
Allowed vs Restricted File Extensions
-
**unknown user**
- Rank: Softmore
- Registered: Mar 16, 2002
- Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
- Posts: 379
I'm for allowed extensions. It's much easier to say ".doc, .jpg, and .tiff" than "everything but .exe and .zip and .gzip etc etc etc," because there are a lot of extensions that would put the site at a security risk, and it's hard to keep track of all of them. Best I think to just disallow everything but a handful of special extensions.
- Moderated by:
- Support
