Linux

6693 readers

208 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon

anzo

dwraf_of_ignorance

285

Am in the only one who cringes at install instructions that require piping some curl output into bash? (self.linux)

submitted 2 weeks ago by cschreib to c/linux

163 comments fedilink hide all child comments

curl https://some-url | sh

I see this all over the place nowadays, even in communities that, I would think, should be security conscious. How is that safe? What's stopping the downloaded script from wiping my home directory? If you use this, how can you feel comfortable?

I understand that we have the same problems with the installed application, even if it was downloaded and installed manually. But I feel the bar for making a mistake in a shell script is much lower than in whatever language the main application is written. Don't we have something better than "sh" for this? Something with less power to do harm?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] zygo_histo_morpheus 87 points 2 weeks ago (19 children)

You have the option of piping it into a file instead, inspecting that file for yourself and then running it, or running it in some sandboxed environment. Ultimately though, if you are downloading software over the internet you have to place a certain amount of trust in the person your downloading the software from. Even if you're absolutely sure that the download script doesn't wipe your home directory, you're going to have to run the program at some point and it could just as easily wipe your home directory at that point instead.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (9 children)

You have the option of piping it into a file instead, inspecting that file for yourself and then running it, or running it in some sandboxed environment.

That's not what projects recommend though. Many recommend piping the output of an HTTP transfer over the public Internet directly into a shell interpreter. Even just

curl https://... > install.sh; sh install.sh

would be one step up. The absolute minimum recommendation IMHO should be

curl https://... > install.sh; less install.sh; sh install.sh

but this is still problematic.

Ultimately, installing software is a labourious process which requires care, attention and the informed use of GPG. It shouldn't be simplified for convenience.

Also, FYI, the word "option" implies that I'm somehow restricted to a limited set of options in how I can use my GNU/Linux computer which is not the case.

[–] zygo_histo_morpheus -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean if you think that it's bad for linux culture because you're teaching newbies the wrong lessons, fair enough.

My point is that most people can parse that they're essentially asking you to run some commands at a url, and if you have even a fairly basic grasp of linux it's easy to do that in whatever way you want. I don't know if I personally would be any happier if people took the time to lecture me on safety habits, because I can interpret the command for myself. curl https://some-url | sh is terse and to the point, and I know not to take it completely literally.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

linux culture

snigger

you're teaching newbies the wrong lessons

The problem is not that it's teaching bad lessons, it's that it's actually doing bad things.

most people can parse that they're essentially asking you to run some commands at a url

I know not to take it completely literally

Then it needn't be written literally.

I think you're giving the authors of such installation instructions too much credit. I think they intend people to take it literally. I think this because I've argued with many of them.