From: Erik Veenstra <pan@...>
Date: 2006-02-09T05:48:22+09:00
Subject: Re: Sandboxing eval'd code

On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:46:54 -0800, m4dc4p wrote:

> Could you elaborate a little more on what you are showing
> here?

I'm showing 3 ways of doing what you want to achieve, in
increasing order of safety. (Although the definitions of the
methods are in decreasing order of safety...) That' all.

> Specifically, why is it called "de_inspect_unsafe"

Because it's not as safe as "de_inspect". And I want to trigger
some alarm bells in case one want to use it... :)

> and what is the array in "p [self, 1]", "p [self, 2]" etc
> for?

If you don't get this, well, get any other string of Ruby code.
It's not important.

> I have also wondered about this issue myself and would like
> to see what people have done. I'd love to see why's "try
> ruby" code but that is probably a pipe dream ...

Just ask him...

gegroet,
Erik V. - http://www.erikveen.dds.nl/