[Bug-wget] [bug #51239] Option for fileviewer

[Peter Passchier]

URL:
  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?51239>

                 Summary: Option for fileviewer
                 Project: GNU Wget
            Submitted by: pepa65
            Submitted on: Thu 15 Jun 2017 06:58:38 AM UTC
                Category: Feature Request
                Severity: 3 - Normal
                Priority: 5 - Normal
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
         Originator Name: pepa65
        Originator Email: 
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
                 Release: None
        Operating System: GNU/Linux
         Reproducibility: Every Time
           Fixed Release: None
         Planned Release: None
              Regression: None
           Work Required: None
          Patch Included: No

    _______________________________________________________

Details:

This request has to do with about piping wget-downloaded scripts into bash,
(or some other interpreter) often to install programs or do other tasks. Some
say you should never do this (always download and view the script before
executing it manually), but the practice remains because it is so convenient.
If only it were safe..!

Background:
https://www.idontplaydarts.com/2016/04/detecting-curl-pipe-bash-server-side/
https://sysdig.com/blog/friends-dont-let-friends-curl-bash/

My feature request is to include a tiny text viewer with the wget binary that
can be activated by a command line switch, that allows users to view what has
been downloaded before piping it on. Ctrl-C would abort, and some other key
would signify it's OK to continue.

wget -qO- --viewpipe https://url.to/script |bash
(maybe --viewpipe would imply output to stdout?)

I understand your first reaction would be feature creep, but it would make the
world a safer place for people engaging in piping wget into bash. The
alternate option would be to have a little application in between wget and
bash, except that application also doesn't exist, and it most likely would not
be installed, and it's less convenient overall. The added size would be really
minimal.

Wouldn't that be a great added value??
Peter





    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?51239>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/