[Bf-committers] "Security" gets in the way

Jason Wilkins jason.a.wilkins at gmail.com
Sat May 1 04:53:00 CEST 2010


On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Benjamin Tolputt <btolputt at internode.on.net
> wrote:

> I believe that resistance to this idea is based around the very valid
> question of "Who is going to maintain this subset interpreter?".


I understand this and is why I need to look and see just how simple it is to
write a python interpreter in pypy.  If pypy really is a "meta-circular
interpreter" it should be a small amount of code to maintain.  For example,
a Scheme interpreter, written in Scheme is tiny.  Most people probably think
of how difficult it is to write a python interpreter in C and think it would
be a ton of code but it could actually be very simple if written in PyPy.  I
won't say much more until I actually find the time to look at it though.

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Ruslan Merkulov <r.merkulov at gmail.com>
 wrote:

> I believe that security is 10% technical and 90% social problem, so
> "web of trust" + educating users on security issues seems to be most
> logical solution


I totally agree with this.  However, the 10% still needs to be done and I
think that part of that 10% is at least declaring that rigs should not be
able read files and connect to the internet unless the user really wants
them to.

That's my 2 cents :)


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list