GNU bug report logs - #45198
28.0.50; Sandbox mode

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: alan <at> idiocy.org, mattiase <at> acm.org, 45198 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, p.stephani2 <at> gmail.com, joaotavora <at> gmail.com
Subject: bug#45198: 28.0.50; Sandbox mode
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 22:14:09 +0300

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: mattiase <at> acm.org,  joaotavora <at> gmail.com,  p.stephani2 <at> gmail.com,
>   stefan <at> marxist.se,  45198 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,  alan <at> idiocy.org
> Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 14:47:34 -0400
> 
> >> Normally, this untrusted ELisp code (the one present within
> >> `eval-when-compile` and macros defined within the file) limits itself to
> >> quite simple sexp manipulation, so the sandboxing can be quite
> >> restrictive, disallowing things like user interaction, uses of
> >> subprocesses, or writing to files.
> > How is this different from byte-compiling some code, e.g. one
> > downloaded from some elpa?
> 
> The normal way to enable flymake is something like
> 
>     (add-hook 'emacs-lisp-mode #'flymake-mode)
> 
> so the file gets compiled just because you're looking at it.
> That's quite different from an explicit request from the user to compile
> a file.

It is?  Sorry, I don't see the difference, not a significant one.  If
you are implying that one does something conscious and deliberate
before byte-compiling a file, then one could also remove Flymake from
the hook while at that.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.