Sven Almgren wrote: > But is this really needed? How does M$ flightsim extensions do? You > have to trust the source somewhat, We could sneak in bad code in > fgfs too, and ppl would run it anyway... Can the addoncreators be > trustet as much as "we" can?
Sure. FlightGear is a local program, and software it loads from the local drive can certainly do local I/O if it wants without breaking typical security models. That's the whole idea behind being able to download software from the internet in the first place. :) My historical fear has been the interaction with the MP environment: the MP code can write to the property tree, and arbitrary property nodes have on various occasions be hooked to execute Nasal code. Being able to execute arbitrary Nasal code on another machine over the network would be a security disaster if that code could do I/O or spawn programs, etc... What Melchior has done is fine with me, architecturally. Ideally, I guess I'd prefer a sandbox on the other side: an architecture that expressly prevents network data from being executed somehow, probably by strictly limiting the areas in the property tree it can write to. But this kind of architecture can work too: it just requires that every "potentially unsafe" operation be sandboxed in the same way as I/O. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
