On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 05:16:51PM +0800, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: > On 4/4/08, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If the majority of the users keep their files in a subdirectory, my > > > feature is not in the way of anything, right? So why do you want to > > > enforce such a policy when you do not have to? > > > > You mean like when microsoft thought it would be nice to let people > > send exe files by e-mail and execute them by double clicking? The kind > > of feature that should not be a problem for anyone... > > If he really wants arbitrary embedded files with absolute paths, then > on Linux this could be done securely with a namespace virtualisation > tool like plasticFS or plash. (In the long term, running running latex > inside a security tool like Plash seems like a good idea anyway, given > that a .tex file comes dangerously close to being a shell script, > which is not really any safer than an exe.)
The typical TeX installation is not able to do much harm. Andre'
