Why don't you make a static class called System with all the system calls
mapping to java.lang.System and put it in the class path. That way all
System calls go to your System class and not java.lang.System.
Matt Bauer
Euler Solutions
Rhett Guthrie wrote:
> not sure if this will work, but you could modify java.lang.System.java
> rebuild java.* packages from the src.jar that comes with the JDK. re-jar
> rt.jar (the packages are sealed so they need to be together.) run your
> app server on your hacked JDK.
>
> i would try it, but i dont know if it will work. i think the vm does
> some weird stuff that breaks when you try this. i once tried to rebuild
> javax.naming (so i could get some debug info for JBuilder). JBuilder, at
> least, didn't like it...
>
> -rg
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Kolaci [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 11:51 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [jBoss-User] Protection from System.exit(0);
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was considering doing a virtual hosting solution
> > that allows Apache+JBoss+Tomcat to allow users
> > to implement their own webapps. Is there any
> > protection from a user putting a "System.exit(0)"
> > into their code? Is there a way to prevent this?
> >
> > Should the virtual hosting features of tomcat
> > be used or should there be a separate JVM for
> > each JBoss+Tomcat, all under a single Apache?
> > Has anyone done this already?
> >
> > Any comments?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
