[#955] Ruby 1.4.3 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Ruby 1.4.3 is out, check out:
1 message
1999/12/07
[#961] Ruby compileable by C++ compiler? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Hi,
8 messages
1999/12/10
[#962] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#963] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
1999/12/10
Wei,
[#964] Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Hi,
15 messages
1999/12/10
[#966] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— nakajima kengo<ringo@...>
1999/12/10
Hello Clemens,
[#967] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#989] a question about to_i — Friedrich Dominicus <Friedrich.Dominicus@...>
Sorry, I'm quite new to ruby. But I encounterd the following problem. If
17 messages
1999/12/19
[ruby-talk:00967] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
From:
matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date:
1999-12-10 14:54:06 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #967
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:00964] Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?"
on 99/12/10, Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@alcatel.de> writes:
|My question now: Is there any possibility to restrict the access to
|certain commands within my embedded interpreter? I think especially
|for commands like: open, system, require, socket, loading
|extensions... and the like.
How about removing them explicitly by rb_remove_method().
void rb_remove_method(VALUE klass, const char *name);
The socket interface is implemented by extension, so that prohibiting
require restricts them.
The other possibility is using `safe level', by setting it level 3
using `rb_set_safe_level(3)', the untrusted script should run safely.
open, system, require, etc. will cause SecurityError exception.
Notice `safe level' feature may not be complete, it's still under
development.
Hope this helps.
matz.