Derrick Coetzee <dc at moonflare.com> said:
>      I'm thinking of using Squeak in an environment where many users,
>      some untrusted, will be able to write Squeak "scripts" (methods
>      essentially) to extend an environment contained within a single
>      image on a server. [...]
>
I'm aware of two projects that strive to implement sandboxing in Smalltalk.
One is Oasis, but that seems to have moved from the location the Squeak Swiki
is pointing to, and the other is Islands,
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2074, which is interesting if only because
of the detailed article that Lex wrote on the subject, and which will show you
that locking down Squeak for 'strange' scripts is harder than you might think
:-).

The implementation of Islands seems to have been touched last September,
judging by the timestamps zip file, so it might work on current versions
of Squeak. Don't be disappointed if it doesn't - this sort of stuff is
highly dependent on the whole environment and probably is guaranteed to
work on a single version of Squeak only.

(and as there seem to be big blue ghosts swarming around that instantaneously
grant my Squeak wishes, I hereby express my interest in having this included
in the base ;-). Seriously, I think that sandboxing is extremely
important for things like Bob's SuperSwiki and more).


-- 
Cees de Groot               http://www.cdegroot.com     <cg at cdegroot.com>
GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD  1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B