Re: [Python-Dev] In defense of Capabilities [was: doc for new restricted execution design for Python]

2006-07-06 Thread Talin
Brett Cannon wrote: > On 7/5/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Transitioning from the checked to the unchecked state could only be done >> via C code. So the 'file' wrapper, for example, would switch over to the >> unchecked interpreter before calling th

Re: [Python-Dev] In defense of Capabilities [was: doc for new restricted execution design for Python]

2006-07-07 Thread Talin
Brett Cannon wrote: > On 7/6/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And if we can call it for every operation, then we don't have to spend >> time hunting down all of the possible loopholes and ways in which 'file' >> or other restricted objects might be

Re: [Python-Dev] In defense of Capabilities [was: doc for new restricted execution design for Python]

2006-07-07 Thread Talin
he 'real' file handle - in other words, replace the 'file-like object' wrapper with a 'config-like object' wrapper. Merely passing the poisoned file handle to 'config' doesn't work, because 'config' doesn't know how to safely handle

Re: [Python-Dev] In defense of Capabilities [was: doc for new restricted execution design for Python]

2006-07-08 Thread Talin
e( path, perms ): if perms == 'r': # Trivial example, a real proxy would be more # sophisticated, and probably configurable. return protect( file( path, perms ), methods=set('ope

<    1   2