Re: Specification for Trusted PLs?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

>> Well, the best way to define what a trusted language can do is to
>> define a *whitelist* of what it can do, not a blacklist of what it
>> can't do. That's the only way to get a complete definition. It's then
>> up to the implementation step to figure out how to represent that in
>> the form of tests.

> Yes, PL/Perl is following this approach. For a whitelist see
> plperl_opmask.h (generated by plperl_opmask.pl at build phase).

Ah, okay, I can mostly agree with that. My objection was with trying
to build a cross-language generic whitelist. But it looks like the
ship has already sailed upthread and we've more or less got a working
definition. David, I think you started this thread, I assume you have
some concrete reason for asking about this (new trusted language?).
May have been stated, but I missed it.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201005241025
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkv6jE4ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjWugCdEwR/n0V3IeFB7w/h5hhPQW/J
ln0An2FZKa2CHWaWdHKOvQvEbBIvyzwK
=wqO5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----