I repeat: there is no way a language can prevent illicit activity if it is within the user's security profile, especially if the user has access to the source code and authority to change it: DBA's need to be able to read and write databases, sysadmins need to be able to read and write user account information.
And what is the implementation language behind E, CaPerl, etc? I would bet a fair amount of money it's C; is hiding C's vulnerabilities behind a "secure" language front-end really secure? Or is it just papering over a problem?
emc
NetlibIn reply to Re^6: Attack on Perl or Perl's need better PR (again)
by swampyankee
in thread Attack on Perl or Perl's need better PR (again)
by wazoox
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |