Hacker News Reader

Comment by sethammons | Hacker News Reader

> SQL injection (Go's database integration is still the wild west)

Could you elaborate on this? I thought you were safe if you used the '?' parameter replacement.

Oh, you are, to the extent that you are when you directly use parameterized queries anywhere (ie, there are corner cases). But unlike Java-world and Python-world and Ruby-world, there aren't really idiomatic mainstream heavyweight database interfaces in Go-world, so if your application is dynamically composing its own SQL queries, which many serious applications end up doing, you can end up with concatenated SQL and the attendant bugs.

I'm not going to go into a fresh Django project optimistic about my chances of finding SQLI, but a database-heavy Go program, that's one of the first things I'm going to take a whack at.

Do you think Go might have better DB libraries if generics ever land? Or what else might be holding it back?

I don't know. I wrote a code-generating ORM for my own projects, which is what I use. But lack of generics isn't, for example, what makes Go projects hew so closely to net/http and net/http compatible interfaces, rather than the more elaborate interfaces people write in Python and Ruby; there's also just a "less is more" ethos in Go-world.

Just putting it out there to spread the word: sqlx[1] and sqlz[2] Go libraries are very good. They take a lot of pain out of mapping Go structs to resultsets and also prevent SQL Injection. sqlx seems to be quite popular but sqlz could do with some love.

[1] https://github.com/jmoiron/sqlx [2] https://github.com/ido50/sqlz

You don't think gorm is mainstream? It isn't the only choice, but is used pretty extensively.

I'm familiar with gorm, but haven't seen it at any of our clients.

Fair, perhaps we can fix that with an audit soonish :)

We use it on all our projects though it really needs improved/additional m:n handling.

gorm (or any other ORM for that matter) is no silver bullet and just introduces unwanted complexity in the code.

Now, instead of being able to quickly see a query in one place what commonly happen is people breaking down all things and creating "helper" functions in strange ways to select, limit, order, and any other stuff, and ending up with something so complex you waste a lot of time to understand and only the original writer knows where to find anything. For me, this adds way more issues than any security concerns you might have related to learning SQL properly, too – and if you are using an ORM chances are you already know how SQL works anyways (and you can use static analysis tools to reduce the errors, plus the reduced cognitive load in using vanilla SQL).

You should be, but because a lot sql in Go is still just strings it makes it easy for someone to bypass because of laziness/sloppiness/distracted/whatever when composing queries. There is also the issue that if the Go code needs to run on Postgres it has to use '$' params instead of '?'. So again, back to string concatenation to support both or use some library like squirrel[1].

[1] https://github.com/Masterminds/squirrel

Is it common to write apps that target multiple databases with SQL as the abstraction point? SQL behaves so differently across vendors (with respect to performance, extensions, etc) that I would be more inclined to write distinct queries for each vendor rather than try to find strings optimal for every vendor.

It used to be much more common when we shipped software to enterprises that required particular databases.

It’s much less common in SaaS environments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com