Bit of an odd one I know.
We have an install script provided to us by the product developers, we implement this product across multiple servers but the default install script they provide is only designed for a single server. As such we have created a shell script with SSHs across all the servers and runs the script, the issue is that the inputs into the default script are hidden but by running it through our script they are no longer hidden.
Here's the gist of it:
sshCmdString=echo "./INSTALLSCRIPT.sh CONFIG-PARAMETERS
ssh -T $sshuser#$HOST $sshCmdString
I'm wondering how I would go about altering the ssh script to hide the input again?
I know read -s hides input within a bash script but I've found that this hides all the outputs of running the script if I put in before/in the command to run the script on the other servers.
Is there another option out there that will hide inputs but display outputs/logging from the script?
Related
I am writing an initial setup shell script for a Mac.
When I run the script, it asks for the password several times.
Is there any way to make this happen only once during script execution?
If possible, I would like to know how to actively ask for it at the beginning of the script, instead of asking for it when some command requires it.
I have to build one application which on button click starts passing command with putty.exe how can it be done with process.start ?
Process.start(#"C:\putty.exe")
ProcessStartInfo startinfo = new ProcessStartInfo();
startInfo.FileName=#"C:\putty.exe"
startInfo.Arguments = "some load session";
this is my current code but i want to push certain script and commands to putty terminal as well
It looks like PuTTY's command line support is rather minimal, but the -m option may work:
From http://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/0.67/htmldoc/Chapter3.html#using-cmdline
3.8.3.6 -m: read a remote command or script from a file
The -m option performs a similar function to the ‘Remote command’ box in the SSH panel of the PuTTY configuration box (see section 4.18.1). However, the -m option expects to be given a local file name, and it will read a command from that file.
With some servers (particularly Unix systems), you can even put multiple lines in this file and execute more than one command in sequence, or a whole shell script; but this is arguably an abuse, and cannot be expected to work on all servers. In particular, it is known not to work with certain ‘embedded’ servers, such as Cisco routers.
You'll have to put your command(s) in a file before and pass that to PuTTY, but for simple tasks, it could work.
As mentioned in a comment on the question, Plink sounds much more amenable to what you're trying to do, as it (appears to) support a fully interactive session via the StandardInput and StandardOutput properties on the object you'll get back from Process.Start().
I have a shell script that is using echo to give a continuous output (the progress of an rsync) that I am using AppleScript to run with administrator privileges. Before I was using NSTask to run the shell script, but I couldn't find a way to run it with the privileges that it needed, so now I am using applescript to run it. When it was running via NSTask, I could use an output pipe and waitForDataInbackgroundAndNotify to get the continuous output and put it into a text field, but now that I am using AppleScript, I cannot seem to find a way to accomplish this. The shell script is still using echo, but it seems to get lost in the AppleScript "wrapper." How do I make sure that the AppleScript sees the output from the shell script and passes it on to the application? Remember, this isn't one single output, but continuous output.
Zero is correct. When you use do shell script, you can consider it similar to using backticks in perl. The command will be executed, and the everything sent to STDOUT will be returned as the result.
The only work around would be to have the your command write the output to a temporary file and then use do shell script "foo" without waiting. From there, you can read from the file sequentially using native AppleScript commands. It's clunky, but it'll work in a pinch.
I am attempting to write an expect script, which executes/runs another shell script. This shell script configures an emulator, so the expect script is intended to automatically configure the emulator by sending back the appropriate data. However, when I wrote exec followed by the name of the shell script in my expect script, nothing happened. The console just sits and waits. Entering strings and whatnot does not appease the script. Failure to launch. DOA... I read from other posts that using exec is not a good fit when interacting with the subprogram is necessary.
Any advice for how I can execute the shell script within the expect script then?
Thanks!
If you want to interact with the shell script, you need to spawn it, then expect to see patterns and send responses.
If you're brand new to expect, check out the book "Exploring Expect" by the author of expect Don Libes.
I have a node.js app which is using the child_process.execFile command to run a command-line utility.
I'm worried that it would be possible for a user to run commands locally (a rm / -rf horror scenario comes to mind).
How secure is using execFile for Bash scripts? Any tips to ensure that flags I pass to execFile are escaped by the unix box hosting the server?
Edit
To be more precise, I'm more wondering if the arguments being sent to the file could be interpreted as a command and executed.
The other concern is inside the bash script itself, which is technically outside the scope of this question.
Using child_process.execFile by itself is perfectly safe as long as the user doesn't get to specify the command name.
It does not run the command in a shell (like child_process.exec does), so there is no need to escape anything.
child_process.execFile will execute commands with the user id of the node process, so it can do anything that user could do, which includes removing all the server files.
Not a good idea to let user pass in command as you seem to be implying by your question.
You could consider running the script in a sandbox by using chroot, and limiting the commands and what resides on the available file system, but this could get complet in a hurry.
The command you pass will get executed directly via some flavor of exec, so unless what you trying to execute is a script, it does not need to be escaped in any way.