| [reply] |
That way requires a LOT of trust in the safety of Safe.
Perhaps so, but I do not expect that trust to be misplaced. Tcl uses the same concept for its "safe" interpreters and I do not recall any exploits in either that Tcl facility or Perl's Safe. Do you have a counterexample?
The safe way of saving and restoring data is to handle it as data, not as code.
I agree that that is the preferred option, but interface constraints from existing systems can interfere.
| [reply] |
Perhaps so, but I do not expect that trust to be misplaced.
The issue is that Safe is opcode-specific, so it requires knowledge of the Perl internals: what code is compiled to which opcodes, which opcodes should I allow, what does each allowed opcode do, and how have those opcodes changed across Perl versions.
Update: See also the thread More strongly discourage Safe.pm? on P5P.
| [reply] |