Re: [ANN] Lunatik -- NetBSD kernel scripting with Lua (GSoC project

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 07:34:43PM -0300, Lourival Vieira Neto wrote:
 > > A signature only tells you whose neck to wring when the script
 > > misbehaves. :-) Since a Lua script running in the kernel won't be
 > > able to forge a pointer (right?), or conjure references to methods or
 > > data that weren't in its environment at the outset, you can run it
 > > in a highly restricted environment so that many kinds of misbehavior
 > > are difficult or impossible.  Or I would *think* you can restrict the
 > > environment in that way; I wonder what Lourival thinks about that.
 > 
 > I wouldn't say better =). That's exactly how I'm thinking about
 > address this issue: restricting access to each Lua environment. For
 > example, a script running in packet filtering should have access to a
 > different set of kernel functions than a script running in process
 > scheduling.

...so what do you do if the script calls a bunch of kernel functions
and then crashes?

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost