On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Gwern Branwen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Jan Stolarek <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Gwern, and what do you think about James' fork of lambdabot? It seems > that there was a lot of work > > put into it and that this is indeed a good starting point to continue > development. > > I haven't looked at the diffs; if as he says the security around the > evaluation has been weakened, that's a deal-breaker until it's fixed. > lambdabot can't be insecure since it will be run in a public IRC. > I absolutely agree. There are sandboxing things we can do around the lambdabot instance, but Haskell has a lot of opportunities for statically disallowing questionable things. I would like to start our defense there and add layers around that. My real reason for reviving this thread: Can I get a status update, please? Thanks, Jason
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
