From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2003-08-06T17:01:43+09:00
Subject: Re: Marshal format "safe"?


"Ryan Pavlik" <rpav@users.sourceforge.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20030805233837.7ed888e1.rpav@users.sf.net...
> I experienced an error today on what appeared to be bad data fed to
> Marshal.  I don't have the data on hand and I'm not sure why it was
> generated, but ruby crashed with a "failed to allocate memory" error.

Maybe the dataset is just too big.  This can easily happen if you send a
huge chunk from the server to a smaller client.

> Now, I'm using Marshalled data over the network, if there's potential
> for random data to kill ruby, this is _bad_.  The box in question is
> using a ruby prerelease, but I'm not sure if anything has changed or
> not.

You might run into problems if both machines don't share the same version
of Marshal (i.e. Ruby release).

> Basically, I'm just asking the question: is the Marshal format "safe",
> at least in 1.8.0 final?

AFAIK yes.  There was a recent minor change though, at least I remember a
posting from Matz within the last weeks saying so.

Regards

    robert