Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2014
Karl Williamson wrote: > It seems to me that by lowering the ratio so that greater than about > 15-20% non-text cause the file to be classified as binary, while > expanding the text characters by the 95 upper Latin1 printable > characters (except for \xFF) will give good results, better than the > existing. Why do we use percent cutoffs in the first place? Either it is printable/glyphable or its not. perlfunc does document the %s behavior, so I would guess ANY change to the algorithm would break backcompat for the few people willing to use such an unreliable algo. I would suggest to leave it alone as a backcompat/legacy/obsolete feature, or deprecate and remove -T/-B and tell people to use CPAN/something smarter for their specific purpose. Being purely printable doesn't mean a string/data is risk free but a fixed set of rules is better than a % "guess". http://www.blackhatlibrary.net/Shellcode/Null-free http://www.blackhatlibrary.net/Ascii_shellcodeThread Previous | Thread Next