in reply to Re: Browsers as stand-alone UI
in thread Browsers as stand-alone UI

... I considered it a bit too powerful.

I'm curious - what did you consider it too powerful for? That's an odd sentiment to have, IMHO.

Also, would this same trick work under WinXP?

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Browsers as stand-alone UI
by hardburn (Abbot) on Apr 07, 2004 at 18:36 UTC

    what did you consider it too powerful for?

    I'd personally consider it a security risk. Safe.pm not withstanding, Perl doesn't have a lot of sandboxing features that are typical of browser-based langauges.

    Also, would this same trick work under WinXP?

    It should.

    ----
    : () { :|:& };:

    Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated

[reply]
[d/l]
      I am wondering how this is different to a script written in some VB derivative via the WSH. Surely that has just as much danger potential?
[reply]

        I don't know what sort of sandboxing VB has available, but it probably does have just as many problems. This places Win32 sysadmins in a tough spot--*nix people have been nagging on Windows to get proper scripting support for years, and now that they have it, they're forced to shut it off because of the massive security holes it creates.

        ----
        : () { :|:& };:

        Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Meditations