You aren't entirely wrong - .NET 2.0 RTM was missing functionality we needed 
(partial trust reflection emit) but we got that in SP1.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Foord
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 9:17 AM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] restrict scripting access

Cool. I *thought* that the reason IronPython required full trust was due
to bugs in the CLR, and am delighted to hear that I'm wrong!

Michael

Dino Viehland wrote:
> Yep, it sure is - that's the reason why we leave this work to the .NET 
> framework and avoid taking the burden upon ourselves :).
>
> There's nothing, other than bugs, in IronPython that prevents it from running 
> in partial trust - look at Silverlight where IronPython runs with no 
> permissions.  There have been a few bugs which have prevented us from running 
> on the desktop CLR in partial trust - generally once we find them they're 
> easy to fix.  Tomas fixed some of those when looking at getting IronRuby 
> running in partial trust and we'll take at look at the issues that block 
> IronPython as well when we start pushing on this.
>
> Once the bugs are gone hosts can either create a partial trust app domain or 
> simply Deny or PermitOnly permissions before calling into IronPython.  The 
> user code would then only have access to the .NET functionality that your 
> security policy outlines.  If you so wanted your own object model could be 
> fully trusted for when the user calls back into you.  What enables this is 
> that IronPython its self runs 100% w/o any trust - it's marked 
> SecurityTransparent.  So any actions that IronPython attempts to perform 
> require full demands upon the code calling into IronPython.  You might need 
> to implement your own fully trusted host which handles access to the file 
> system but that should be trivial to do.
>
> This offers 100% security which is a nice guarantee to have.  But many apps 
> might just need a "3 foot high wall" which their users are unlikely to jump 
> over and for those maybe getting rid of import clr and any available DLLs 
> will be sufficient.  I'm not sure where we're currently prioritizing these 
> bugs so any feedback on how interesting these scenarios are would be helpful 
> :).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanghyeon Seo
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 7:04 AM
> To: Discussion of IronPython
> Subject: Re: [IronPython] restrict scripting access
>
> 2008/6/30 Rainer Worbis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> is there a way to restrict access to objects or namespaces within a script?
>> We use IronPython for providing scripting functionality within our .NET
>> Application but would like to restrict access to certain functions. Has
>> anybody information or a sample how to do that?
>>
>
> Proper sandboxing is a difficult problem. Take a look at the following
> post for a good overview.
>
> http://radix.twistedmatrix.com/2008/05/requirements-for-restricted-execution.html
>
> --
> Seo Sanghyeon
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>


--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
http://www.trypython.org/
http://www.ironpython.info/
http://www.resolverhacks.net/
http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com

Reply via email to