| ---[ Phrack Magazine Volume 8, Issue 52 January 26, 1998, article 01 of 20 | |
| -------------------------[ P H R A C K 5 2 I N D E X | |
| --------[ Choose your own $PATH adventure | |
| Whew. You would be quite surprised at the evil wheels I had to set in | |
| motion in order to get this issue out. According to Newton, a Phrack Issue | |
| remains at rest or continues to move in a straight line with a uniform | |
| velocity if there is no unbalanced force acting on it. This issue was at rest. | |
| Its velocity was constant. And there were few forces acting on it. Anyhow, | |
| after many machinations it's here. Enjoy. | |
| I have a gripe. Something upon which I'd like dwell for a spell. Let's | |
| talk about coding aesthetic (from the C programming standpoint). Now, this is | |
| not a harangue about effective coding or efficient coding, I'll save those for | |
| some other time (perhaps for the time when I feel I can write effective and | |
| efficient code proficiently enough to vituperate to those who do not). I | |
| want to touch down on a few topics of visual appeal, which are overlooked so | |
| often. | |
| The five major areas I will cover are indentation, brace placement, | |
| use of whitespace, commenting, as well as variable and function nomenclature. | |
| I suppose I should also mention that coding style is a personal preference | |
| type of thing. There are all kinds of schools of thought out there, and all | |
| kinds of methodologies on how to write pretty code. In the grand scheme of | |
| things, none are really any more correct than any others, except mine. | |
| C is, for the most part, a format free programming language. Code can be | |
| written with all manner of whitespace, tabs, and newlines. The compiler | |
| certainly doesn't care. The machine doesn't care. This can be a double | |
| edged sword. There is quite a bit of room for artistic interpretation. And | |
| just like in real life, there is a lot of crappy art out there. | |
| Indenting your code is a must. Please, do this. Indentation is here for | |
| one simple reason: to clearly and unequivocally define blocks of control. | |
| However, 8 space tabstops are overkill. Unless you are using a 2 point font on | |
| a 13" screen, 4 spaces should easily define your control blocks. This allows | |
| you to maintain clarity on an 80 column screen while nesting blocks of control | |
| much deeper then you would with 8 space tab stops. 2 space tabstop advocates | |
| should be shot. However, don't let typography take over your code (ala ink | |
| obscuring the intent). If you have 7 million levels of indentation, perhaps | |
| you should rethink your approach to tackling the problem... | |
| Bracing has a simple solution. The most effective use of bracing is in | |
| placing them on newlines so that they neatly enclose the area of control. This | |
| is especially important with nested levels of control. I know this generates | |
| empty lines. Oh well. They're free. Blocks of control become easily visible | |
| and it is easy to isolate one from another. This goes for functions as well | |
| as conditionals and loop structures. I know I go against K&R here. Oh well. | |
| In the pursuit of clear, readable code, whitespace is your friend. Single | |
| space all keywords and all variables and constants separated by commas. It's | |
| a simple thing to do to drastically improve readability. When you have a | |
| series of assignments, one after another, it's a nice touch to line them up on | |
| the closest relative 4 space boundary. And please, no spaces between structure | |
| pointer operators and structure contents. | |
| Commenting is a delicate matter. Descriptive, concise, well written code | |
| shouldn't really need commenting, or at least very much of it. But this isn't | |
| a rant about descriptive, concise, well written code. If you feel the need | |
| to comment your code, follow a few simple rules: | |
| - Keep the comment block as small as possible. | |
| - Don't tab out your comment frames to line up with each other. That's | |
| just plain fucking annoying. If you're doing that, you have too many | |
| comments anyway. | |
| - Commenting datatype declarations rather then the functions that | |
| manipulate them is usually more helpful. | |
| - If you must comment, keep your style as consistent as possible. If the | |
| commenting detracts from the readibilty of your code, you've just ponied | |
| up any clarification you might have achieved with the commenting. | |
| The major exception to these rules are file headers. The beginning of | |
| source and header files should always have some descriptive information, | |
| including: file name, author, purpose, modification dates, etc... These | |
| comment blocks should always have a simple vertical line of unobtrusive | |
| astricks, framed with the required forward slashes. People using C++ style | |
| commenting in C programs should be drawn and quartered. | |
| The other exception to this rule is when you are writing code specifically | |
| for the benefit of others. If the code is intended to be a learning tool, | |
| copious commenting is allowable. | |
| Variable and function nomenclature should have connotation as to what their | |
| purpose in life is. As short as possible while still preserving some sort of | |
| identity. Descriptive names are wonderful, but don't go overboard. Generally, | |
| a condensed one or two word descriptor (possiblely connected via an underscore) | |
| will work fine. And please, no mixed case. The only time uppercase characters | |
| should appear in C code are in symbolic constants and macros (and possibly | |
| strings and comments). | |
| This tirade is the result of my experiences in reading and writing C code. | |
| In my travels as a stalwart mediocre programmer, I have progressed through many | |
| levels of maturity in my programming style. Much of my old code exhibits many | |
| of the very things eschewed as anathema in this jeremiad. Well, what can I | |
| say? I believe that I have grown. I am at home with the me. This is me | |
| breathing. (Tell me what movie that's from, and I will give you a Phrack | |
| Donut.) | |
| Enjoy the magazine. It is by and for the hacking community. Period. | |
| -- Editor in Chief ----------------[ route | |
| -- Director of Public Operations --[ dangergirl | |
| -- Phrack World News --------------[ disorder | |
| -- Werdsmith ----------------------[ loadammo | |
| -------- Elite --------------------> asriel | |
| -- Santa vs. Jesus ----------------[ ISS vs. SNI | |
| -- Festively Plump ----------------[ Cartman | |
| -- Extra Special Thanks -----------[ No one. | |
| -- Official Phrack CD -------------[ FLA/Flavour of the Weak | |
| -- Official Phrack Drink ----------[ `The C Kilborn` (2.9 parts ketel one, | |
| -----------------------------------| .1 parts tonic) | |
| -- Shout Outs and Thank Yous ------[ Lords of Acid, cantor, Yggdrasil, | |
| -----------------------------------| snokerash, Voyager, TNO, Jeff Thompson, | |
| -----------------------------------| angstrom, redragon, Rob Pike, halflife | |
| -- B.A. Baracus Phrack Fracas -----[ loadammo vs. Death Veggie | |
| -- Original flip.c author (props) -[ datagram | |
| -- Gas Face Given (drops) ---------[ solo, klepto | |
| Phrack Magazine V. 8, #52, January 26, 1998. ISSN 1068-1035 | |
| Contents Copyright (c) 1998 Phrack Magazine. All Rights Reserved. Nothing | |
| may be reproduced in whole or in part without written permission from the | |
| editor in chief. Phrack Magazine is made available quarterly to the public, | |
| free of charge. Go nuts people. | |
| Subscription requests, articles, comments, whatever should be directed to: | |
| phrackedit@phrack.com | |
| Submissions to the above email address may be encrypted with the following key: | |
| -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- | |
| Version: 2.6.2 | |
| mQENAzMgU6YAAAEH/1/Kc1KrcUIyL5RBEVeD82JM9skWn60HBzy25FvR6QRYF8uW | |
| ibPDuf3ecgGezQHM0/bDuQfxeOXDihqXQNZzXf02RuS/Au0yiILKqGGfqxxP88/O | |
| vgEDrxu4vKpHBMYTE/Gh6u8QtcqfPYkrfFzJADzPEnPI7zw7ACAnXM5F+8+elt2j | |
| 0njg68iA8ms7W5f0AOcRXEXfCznxVTk470JAIsx76+2aPs9mpIFOB2f8u7xPKg+W | |
| DDJ2wTS1vXzPsmsGJt1UypmitKBQYvJrrsLtTQ9FRavflvCpCWKiwCGIngIKt3yG | |
| /v/uQb3qagZ3kiYr3nUJ+ULklSwej+lrReIdqYEABRG0GjxwaHJhY2tlZGl0QGlu | |
| Zm9uZXh1cy5jb20+tA9QaHJhY2sgTWFnYXppbmU= | |
| =1iyt | |
| -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- | |
| As always, ENCRYPTED SUBSCRIPTION REQUESTS WILL BE IGNORED. Phrack goes out | |
| plaintext. You certainly can subscribe in plaintext. | |
| phrack:~# head -20 /usr/include/std-disclaimer.h | |
| /* | |
| * All information in Phrack Magazine is, to the best of the ability of the | |
| * editors and contributors, truthful and accurate. When possible, all facts | |
| * are checked, all code is compiled. However, we are not omniscient (hell, | |
| * we don't even get paid). It is entirely possible something contained | |
| * within this publication is incorrect in some way. If this is the case, | |
| * please drop us some email so that we can correct it in a future issue. | |
| * | |
| * | |
| * Also, keep in mind that Phrack Magazine accepts no responsibility for the | |
| * entirely stupid (or illegal) things people may do with the information | |
| * contained here-in. Phrack is a compendium of knowledge, wisdom, wit, and | |
| * sass. We neither advocate, condone nor participate in any sort of illicit | |
| * behavior. But we will sit back and watch. | |
| * | |
| * | |
| * Lastly, it bears mentioning that the opinions that may be expressed in the | |
| * article of Phrack Magazine are intellectual property of their authors. | |
| * These opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Phrack Staff. | |
| */ | |
| -------------------------[ T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S | |
| 1 Introduction Phrack Staff 12K | |
| 2 Phrack Loopback Phrack Staff 60K | |
| 3 Line Noise various 79K | |
| 4 Phrack Prophile on o0 Phrack Staff 07K | |
| 5 Everything a hacker needs to know about getting busted Agent Steal 72K | |
| 6 Hardening the Linux Kernel daemon9 42K | |
| 7 The Linux pingd daemon9 17K | |
| 8 Steganography Thumbprinting anonymous 35K | |
| 9 On the Morality of Phreaking Phrack Staff 19K | |
| 10 A Quick NT Interrogation Probe twitch 18K | |
| 11 Subscriber Loop Carrier voyager 48K | |
| 12 Voice Response Systems voyager 18K | |
| 13 Pay Per View (you don't have to) cavalier 19K | |
| 14 The International Crime Syndicate Association D. Demming 20K | |
| 15 Digital Certificates Yggdrasil 14K | |
| 16 Piercing Firewalls bishnu 31K | |
| 17 Protected mode programming and O/S development mythrandir 76K | |
| 18 Weakening the Linux Kernel plaguez 27K | |
| 19 Phrack World News Disorder 64K | |
| 20 extract.c Phrack Staff 08K | |
| 687K | |
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| When Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) was asked to define encryption, the results | |
| were horrific. "Well, I mean, to answer your question, I mean, encryption is | |
| -- the political equivalent of encryption is you ask me a question, I give you | |
| an answer and you don't understand it," he managed. "I mean, I intentionally | |
| garble the answer frequently. I intentionally garble the response so that you | |
| can't understand what I'm saying. And that's -- you notice that I've got the | |
| ability to do that." | |
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| ----[ EOF | |