Live data from Hacker News

GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

chrisacky.posterous.com

51–60 of 205 posts

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#51
post #21
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lost a tremendous amount of respect for Github when I heard they'd suspended his account. I have more of an issue with the Rails team for not accepting that this "feature" is a massive bug that they should've changed ages ago, though.

Why? I would expect any company to suspend the account of someone hacking them.

[deleted]

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#52

I have lost all trust in GitHub, and not because of the vulnerability, but because of their response. With their suspension of hamakov's account and deceptive blog post about the extent of the hole, GitHub has guaranteed that they won't be the first to know about the next vulnerability (and there's always another). I've downgraded my paid account to a free account, and won't keep any non-public data on GitHub in the…

I'm just going to latch on to this comment to make mention of a GitHub alternative for private repositories: http://repositoryhosting.com/

I've been a happy customer for a while now, and have seen them recommended on HN many times. You get unlimited repositories with unlimited users for less than the cost of GitHub's cheapest 5 repo plan.

My open source code is on GH, but it's all also pushed to RH, along with all my private code.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#53

I have lost all trust in GitHub, and not because of the vulnerability, but because of their response. With their suspension of hamakov's account and deceptive blog post about the extent of the hole, GitHub has guaranteed that they won't be the first to know about the next vulnerability (and there's always another). I've downgraded my paid account to a free account, and won't keep any non-public data on GitHub in the…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#54
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating two issues here. He's arguing that the Rails team was ignoring an important issue by noting it was an easy end-user fix, and GitHub overreacted by suspending him after he tried several times to bring it to their attention, and then grossly mislead their user base as to the extent of the issue (which sounds like a really fundamental security issue that any professional Rails developer should know how…

Fair enough. Ignoring the issue and not fixing it after it was brought to their attention to me is where they screwed up. As for the account suspension, I'm not sure I agree that the account should not have been suspended. Github is a code repository first, and I don't think they have an obligation to keep people around who are exposing security flaws by notifying the entire community. As the author of the post point…

Aye, that's where it gets hairy – I (or anyone else) could write equally impassioned blog posts for making him their chief security officer, or for suing him. The article starts going down the road of playing Monday morning quarterback with that issue, but it's short enough that it's acceptable. Not looking forward to the avalanche of posts on either side of the debate, though.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#55

I have lost all trust in GitHub, and not because of the vulnerability, but because of their response. With their suspension of hamakov's account and deceptive blog post about the extent of the hole, GitHub has guaranteed that they won't be the first to know about the next vulnerability (and there's always another). I've downgraded my paid account to a free account, and won't keep any non-public data on GitHub in the…

They suspended the account, they didn't cancel it. On a Sunday morning when you're fixing a security hole and you know who penetrated it you suspend that person's account. On Monday morning you figure out what to do with them.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#56
post #7

I fail to see what GitHub did wrong here. They were attacked, they suspended the account doing the hacking, and they fixed the problem. Then, they blogged about it, explaining in detail what happened. Apparently they weren't quite reverent enough for the person who wrote this article.

Egor is a human whose motivations were totally obvious and whose actions were transparently harmless (and, in fact, net helpful.) The Github team are behaving foolishly if they can't or won't distinguish that from an "attack." Organizations should be expected to make decisions using reasoning that amounts to more than word association, e.g. he "attacked" us, so we'll "suspend" him.

I would disagree with this, quite a lot. He brought up an issue with the Rails team, they pointed him at the canonical, "here is where we talked about this before, sorry." Still not satisfied, he found the same exploit in Github to prove a point. Rather than do the sensible thing by creating a dummy account and contacting Github showing how he messed things up, he barged into the Rails organization and left a silly commit. Github is first and foremost a business organization where lots of companies pay them lots of money to "take this shit seriously" and protect their data, so they did the right thing by shutting him down.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#57
post #31
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I would expect any company to suspend the account of someone hacking them.

He did it under his own name, in a way dad not damage anything, using a problem that has been well known for ages, after attempting to draw attention to the issue several times and being ignored. It is pretty obvious that he did not have any malicious intent, nor intended to do damage (if he wanted to, he could've done massive damage from an anonymous account in ways that wouldn't draw attention to it). The only thin…

> He did it under his own name, in a way dad not damage anything, using a problem that has been well known for ages, after attempting to draw attention to the issue several times and being ignored.

He was ignored by the Rails devs, not by GitHub. Yet GitHub became the target of his attack, because he was "bored" (his word, not mine).

At no stage, as far as we know, did he raise the issue directly with GitHub. As I've said in another thread, he could have done so and requested they disclose the fix publicly (say, within 24 hours) in an effort to force the Rails devs' hands. Instead, he's punished GitHub (who, mind you, probably should have audited for this vulnerability a long while ago) because he was shunned by the Rails devs.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#58

I have lost all trust in GitHub, and not because of the vulnerability, but because of their response. With their suspension of hamakov's account and deceptive blog post about the extent of the hole, GitHub has guaranteed that they won't be the first to know about the next vulnerability (and there's always another). I've downgraded my paid account to a free account, and won't keep any non-public data on GitHub in the…

This is a perfect summary and exactly the sentiments that I couldn't express in the article. I've quoted you with attribution if you are okay with that?

Of course. I can't imagine that I'm the only person leaving GitHub because of this.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#59

I have lost all trust in GitHub, and not because of the vulnerability, but because of their response. With their suspension of hamakov's account and deceptive blog post about the extent of the hole, GitHub has guaranteed that they won't be the first to know about the next vulnerability (and there's always another). I've downgraded my paid account to a free account, and won't keep any non-public data on GitHub in the…

I'm just going to latch on to this comment to make mention of a GitHub alternative for private repositories: http://repositoryhosting.com/ I've been a happy customer for a while now, and have seen them recommended on HN many times. You get unlimited repositories with unlimited users for less than the cost of GitHub's cheapest 5 repo plan. My open source code is on GH, but it's all also pushed to RH, along with all my…

Or you can use bitbucket.org (using Django :-) which has git support and private repositories for free for up to 5 developers.

Re: GitHub and Rails: You have let us all down.

#60
The one "good" thing that comes out of this public exploit is that github was the target.

Github is obscure enough to non-developers but quite well known in the development circle.

This means if you are using github you probably have a damn good idea what the vulnerability is. I'm not a rails developer (mostly python/django) but I get it immediately. This is mostly an issue with the framework helping me shoot myself in the foot.

Sure it's in the documentation. But realistically a good framework gives me sensible defaults so I don't have to refer to the documentation. I trust the framework does the "right thing".

Post reply on HN