[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [DotGNU]Running mono-compiled/non-verifiable apps

From: Fergus Henderson
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]Running mono-compiled/non-verifiable apps
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:01:53 +1100
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On 25-Feb-2003, Rhys Weatherley <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 February 2003 10:02 pm, Fergus Henderson wrote:
> > If so, this behaviour is wrong.  The .NET ECMA spec defines two notions,
> > "verifiable" and "valid", and allows the execution of "unverifiable" code,
> > provided that it is "valid".  Of course it is usually not safe to run
> > untrusted code unless it has been verified.  But it should be possible
> > to execute code which is unverifiable but trusted.
> Errr ... let's back up a bit Fergus.
> What I call the "verifier" does both ECMA validity testing and full-blown ECMA
> verifiability testing.  The "unsafeAllowed" flag to "_ILVerify" is used to 
> switch between these two modes.  I called it a "verifier" before I realised 
> the distinction in the spec.
> (all programs executed from disk are checked for validity, not 
> verifiability, at present)

OK, in that case it sounds like all is well.

But your answer to the original poster's question

> > > > Is there a way to force ilrun to non-verifiable IL?
> > > Not really. [...] Turning off the verifier would basically
> > > turn off the interpreter also. [...]

was rather misleading.  From your description, it sounds like a better
answer would be that yes, ilrun will run non-verifiable IL; just make
sure the files that it is executing are on disk.

Fergus Henderson <address@hidden>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.

reply via email to

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