[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Virtual Machine in the abstract (was Re: [DotGNU]What languages sho

From: Peter Minten
Subject: Re: Virtual Machine in the abstract (was Re: [DotGNU]What languages shouldDotGNU support?)
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:53:29 +0100

Fergus Henderson wrote:

> The drawback of this approach (compared to using just the one intermediate
> language, CIL) is that it is less secure, because it relies on a larger
> trusted code base.  Instead of needing to trust just one interpreter,
> you need to trust all the different languages interpreters.  Bugs in
> the Ruby interpreter, for example, could result in security holes.

Why? The webservice programmer can decide what language he/she wants to use. If
the programmer doesn't believe a language is secure enough he/she can pick
another language. And the user who downloads a webservice can chose to execute
or not.

Support for more languages might even be beneficial to security since a bug in
one language interpreter doesn't affect as much webservices as when only one
language is used.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]