From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs RPC security Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 10:47:08 -0300 Message-ID: References: <87pqo0fx52.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87d3k0fuyr.fsf@lifelogs.com> <20110503.082409.154327143157948374.hanche@math.ntnu.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304430444 7526 80.91.229.12 (3 May 2011 13:47:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 13:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tzz@lifelogs.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Harald Hanche-Olsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 03 15:47:19 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwb-0002jQ-O2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 15:47:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58912 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwb-0003nZ-Bj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 09:47:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35250) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwY-0003nM-6t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 09:47:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwX-0007zc-8U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 09:47:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:44144) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwX-0007zY-5Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 09:47:13 -0400 Original-Received: from 121-249-126-200.fibertel.com.ar ([200.126.249.121]:1614 helo=ceviche.home) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QHFwV-00068F-N4; Tue, 03 May 2011 09:47:12 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 286FE662FC; Tue, 3 May 2011 10:47:09 -0300 (ART) In-Reply-To: <20110503.082409.154327143157948374.hanche@math.ntnu.no> (Harald Hanche-Olsen's message of "Tue, 03 May 2011 08:24:09 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:139050 Archived-At: > The natural way (and only way, I believe) to provide a restricted > execution environment in Common Lisp is to leave the user in a package > that contains only "safe" symbols. As elisp does not have packages in > the CL sense, the only way I can think of would be to not use the > elisp reader at all, and provide you own =E2=80=93 or else go through the= read > form and excise forbidden symbols. This seems like a nontrivial (and > somewhat pointless?) endeavour. Indeed. The way to do it in Elisp is to not use `eval' but instead implement some other protocol/language. Which is why it's outside the scope of server.el. Stefan