On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 05:54:04AM +0100, Tony Sidaway wrote: > My current approach is to compile the user script with an included > preamble which redefines important stuff. For instance: > > (define-macro (dummy name) > `(define ,name (lambda x (force (delay (begin (display (format "~a > is not available~%" ',name)) #f)))))) > > (dummy open-input-file) > (dummy call-with-output-file) > > And so on. > > It seems to me that I need to do this otherwise just about everything > in the namespace will be available at runtime, co-optable for bad > stuff. > > Or am I just being a silly sausage? Is there a better way of doing this?
You should have a look at the sandbox egg. It provides not only a safe environment with lots of destructive procedures unavailable, but it also protects against infinite loops and huge memory consuption. Regards, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth
pgpeOgQqHZelN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
