Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

isc.sans.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 62 posts

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#11

Post by Operyl »

gautamdivgi wrote: post #6
css wrote: post #2

CD Projekt's GoG client has a feature where users can write Python extensions [0] for third party account integrations. To enable this, they ship an entire Python interpreter alongside the app binary [1]. I guess this kind of makes sense, it is way easier than having users manage their own `venv`s and other Python environment stuff. Packaging Python apps for distribution outside of a Python development context is qui…

You can create binaries for python using https://www.pyinstaller.org/ . I've used it well for Linux and mac. Haven't used it for Windows.

Works well on Windows too, we use it with PySide2 for a game client launcher/patcher.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#12

Post by krageon »

css wrote: post #2

CD Projekt's GoG client has a feature where users can write Python extensions [0] for third party account integrations. To enable this, they ship an entire Python interpreter alongside the app binary [1]. I guess this kind of makes sense, it is way easier than having users manage their own `venv`s and other Python environment stuff. Packaging Python apps for distribution outside of a Python development context is qui…

> quite pesky

I've never had a bigger packaging nightmare than for Python and at this point I've worked with a substantial spread of available languages. It's simply embarrassing, especially because I used to like recommending it to people.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#13

Post by wzdd »

MereInterest wrote: post #9
css wrote: post #2

CD Projekt's GoG client has a feature where users can write Python extensions [0] for third party account integrations. To enable this, they ship an entire Python interpreter alongside the app binary [1]. I guess this kind of makes sense, it is way easier than having users manage their own `venv`s and other Python environment stuff. Packaging Python apps for distribution outside of a Python development context is qui…

I've done this before with pyinstaller, and it's pretty straightforward. This wasn't even for a customer-facing application, instead an internal utility that I had initially made to save myself time. The first time I tried to distribute it without bundling the interpreter and libraries, it took a full hour to get it mostly set up for 4 people. Sure, every problem from multiple conflicting python environments, to pip…

I've had both Sophos and Windows Defender pick up innocuous Pyinstaller-based packages as malware, presumably because packaging malware with Pyinstaller is such a common technique. It's quite frustrating if you intend to release the software.

Example issue: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/issues/3802

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#14

Post by magicalhippo »

css wrote: post #2

CD Projekt's GoG client has a feature where users can write Python extensions [0] for third party account integrations. To enable this, they ship an entire Python interpreter alongside the app binary [1]. I guess this kind of makes sense, it is way easier than having users manage their own `venv`s and other Python environment stuff. Packaging Python apps for distribution outside of a Python development context is qui…

Blender includes Python for its extensions (add-ons).

And yes it can be a pain to deal with if you want to load binary modules.

https://docs.blender.org/api/current/info_overview.html

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#15

Post by icegreentea2 »

formerly_proven wrote: post #8
icegreentea2 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shipping your own runtimes as part of heavy application isn't that unusual or limited to Python, especially in the Windows world. For example, JetBrains ships its own Java runtime for all of its IDEs. In fact, the Python world would be simplified if "ship your own runtime and env" as part of your final application was the norm. The Python runtime and stdlib by itself is like 20-30MB packaged up or something. For cert…

CPython is ~7-8 MB zipped. Straight from the source: https://www.python.org/ftp/python/3.9.4/python-3.9.4-embed-a...

Omg, thanks!

I don't know how I missed that all this time... I've going off the "zero/dot" releases of https://winpython.github.io/ this whole time.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#16

Post by MereInterest »

wzdd wrote: post #13
MereInterest wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done this before with pyinstaller, and it's pretty straightforward. This wasn't even for a customer-facing application, instead an internal utility that I had initially made to save myself time. The first time I tried to distribute it without bundling the interpreter and libraries, it took a full hour to get it mostly set up for 4 people. Sure, every problem from multiple conflicting python environments, to pip…

I've had both Sophos and Windows Defender pick up innocuous Pyinstaller-based packages as malware, presumably because packaging malware with Pyinstaller is such a common technique. It's quite frustrating if you intend to release the software. Example issue: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/issues/3802

I've had similar false positives from McAfee when first installing pyinstaller, but not on the using of executables generated by pyinstaller. I hadn't known that pyinstaller was used by malware, and had assumed it was because the bundled interpreter could potentially make any system call, thus making it flag on lots of heuristics.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#17

Post by pansa2 »

wzdd wrote: post #13
MereInterest wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done this before with pyinstaller, and it's pretty straightforward. This wasn't even for a customer-facing application, instead an internal utility that I had initially made to save myself time. The first time I tried to distribute it without bundling the interpreter and libraries, it took a full hour to get it mostly set up for 4 people. Sure, every problem from multiple conflicting python environments, to pip…

I've had both Sophos and Windows Defender pick up innocuous Pyinstaller-based packages as malware, presumably because packaging malware with Pyinstaller is such a common technique. It's quite frustrating if you intend to release the software. Example issue: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/issues/3802

The other issue with using PyInstaller to build a program into a single binary is that every time the program runs, it needs to extract its own contents to a temporary directory. This causes slow start-up and, if the program exits abnormally, orphaned files left on disk.

I think other packaging tools have a workaround for this particular problem but, in my experience, have other issues. I’d love to use Python for building CLI tools, but building a binary is so fragile that I only use the language for prototyping, and rewrite in C++ (maybe Go in future?) for production.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#18

Post by ryanlol »

MereInterest wrote: post #16
wzdd wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had both Sophos and Windows Defender pick up innocuous Pyinstaller-based packages as malware, presumably because packaging malware with Pyinstaller is such a common technique. It's quite frustrating if you intend to release the software. Example issue: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/issues/3802

I've had similar false positives from McAfee when first installing pyinstaller, but not on the using of executables generated by pyinstaller. I hadn't known that pyinstaller was used by malware, and had assumed it was because the bundled interpreter could potentially make any system call, thus making it flag on lots of heuristics.

> assumed it was because the bundled interpreter could potentially make any system call, thus making it flag on lots of heuristics

You seriously overestimate AV “heuristics”.

Re: No Python interpreter? this simple RAT installs its own copy

#19

Post by foepys »

icegreentea2 wrote: post #3
css wrote: post #2

CD Projekt's GoG client has a feature where users can write Python extensions [0] for third party account integrations. To enable this, they ship an entire Python interpreter alongside the app binary [1]. I guess this kind of makes sense, it is way easier than having users manage their own `venv`s and other Python environment stuff. Packaging Python apps for distribution outside of a Python development context is qui…

Shipping your own runtimes as part of heavy application isn't that unusual or limited to Python, especially in the Windows world. For example, JetBrains ships its own Java runtime for all of its IDEs. In fact, the Python world would be simplified if "ship your own runtime and env" as part of your final application was the norm. The Python runtime and stdlib by itself is like 20-30MB packaged up or something. For cert…

> For example, JetBrains ships its own Java runtime for all of its IDEs.

That's actually the recommended way for Java applications nowadays. There is no official current JRE for end-users to download anymore - the newest version you can download from Oracle is 8 update 281. JDK is currently at version 16.

Post reply on HN