Hi Sven,

I personally dislike to interrupt a JEE Thread. ;-)

kind regards

Tobias

> Am 26.01.2016 um 11:55 schrieb Sven Meier <[email protected]>:
> 
> Hi Tobias,
> 
> >Because then you can't send a response anymore. (If you interrupt the actual 
> >request thread)
> 
> you can catch an InterruptedException and continue with any response you like.
> 
> >That solution looks to me like only ensure the java classes not to access 
> >other parts / classes from oder cls - but if you write new File("..."); you 
> >have access - right?
> 
> Honestly I'm not sure.
> 
> Have fun
> Sven
> 
> 
>> On 25.01.2016 21:08, Tobias Soloschenko wrote:
>> Hi Sven,
>> 
>>> Am 25.01.16 um 20:49 schrieb Sven Meier:
>>> Hi Tobias,
>>> 
>>> >The posibility to interrupt the script requires a thread so the script has 
>>> >to run into one
>>> 
>>> why not execute the script on the container thread? It can equally well be 
>>> interrupted.
>> Because then you can't send a response anymore. (If you interrupt the actual 
>> request thread)
>>> 
>>> >There has been no discussion about it since now - I am very happy to read 
>>> >more suggestions! :-)
>>> 
>>> The thread-based solution looks clunky to me. I seems to me sandboxing of a 
>>> script should be based on where it is coming from, instead on who runs it.
>> It is only a request / response paradigm.
>>> 
>>>    http://www.jayway.com/2014/06/13/sandboxing-plugins-in-java/
>>> 
>>> Disclaimer: I didn't work this out completely :P
>> That solution looks to me like only ensure the java classes not to access 
>> other parts / classes from oder cls - but if you write new File("..."); you 
>> have access - right?
>> 
>> kind regards
>> 
>> Tobias
>>> 
>>> Have fun
>>> Sven
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 25.01.2016 20:41, Tobias Soloschenko wrote:
>>>> Hi Sven,
>>>> 
>>>> I don't investigated ProtectedDomain solution, yet.
>>>> 
>>>> The posibility to interrupt the script requires a thread so the script has 
>>>> to run into one. Also the memory check in a separate thread requires it.
>>>> 
>>>> And as of a post (have to search the link) in the oracle forums the devs 
>>>> also mentioned to always use a SecurityManager.
>>>> 
>>>> There has been no discussion about it since now - I am very happy to read 
>>>> more suggestions! :-)
>>>> 
>>>> kind regards
>>>> 
>>>> Tobias
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 25.01.2016 um 20:32 schrieb Sven Meier <[email protected]>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Tobias,
>>>>> 
>>>>> have you investigated usage of a ProtectionDomain instead of a 
>>>>> thread-based security approach?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry if this has been answered before, I didn't follow the discussion 
>>>>> closely.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Sven
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 25.01.2016 17:28, Tobias Soloschenko wrote:
>>>>>> I think because it is not required I would not add it (it also slows 
>>>>>> down a bit)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> kind regards
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 25.01.2016 um 17:25 schrieb Sven Meier <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Well, shouldn't it be disabled again after the script has finished?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> At least because of *symmetry*?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sven
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 25.01.2016 17:16, Tobias Soloschenko wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Sven,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> it stays online as long as the script thread lifes to ensure the 
>>>>>>>> security the whole time the script is executed. (ThreadLocal)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> kind regards
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am 25.01.2016 um 17:12 schrieb Sven Meier <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi Tobias,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> the securityManager is never disabled again, is this intended?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I find this lack of symmetry disturbing ;)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Sven
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 25.01.2016 16:21, Tobias Soloschenko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> hope that everthing is ok with nashorn-parent. :-)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I think I have committed everything to ensure the maximum safety to 
>>>>>>>>>> run the script engine (MemoryLeakDetection, ClassFilter, prevention 
>>>>>>>>>> for endless running script, SecurityManager which can be enabled 
>>>>>>>>>> only for the script threads)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Anyway don't use it as public interface!
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I would be very pleased if someone could review it in detail before 
>>>>>>>>>> release of wicketstuff 7.2.0.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Again thanks a lot to Martin Grigorov who mentioned some points to 
>>>>>>>>>> fix.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> kind regards
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 25.01.2016 um 15:22 schrieb Martin Grigorov 
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm going to release WicketStuff 7.2.0 in the next few days.
>>>>>>>>>>> Please commit your improvements now! Or wait for 7.3.0 :-)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>>>>>>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>>>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
> 

Reply via email to