Re: Security

From: Jeronimo Pellegrini <jpn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:23:33 +0100 (CET)

On 2008-01-31, Andrew Reilly <andrew-newspost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:43:41 +0100, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:

- Although with (safety 1) you can't really crash the application,

Sure you can: just put some bugs in your code. Forget to convert an
input string into a number somewhere, before doing some maths on it?
Easy, peasy.

Hm, yeash, sounds like fun.
So, not using (safety 0), plus being careful when using (coerce) and
other functions that would bypass type safety.

I think doing lots of automated testing helps too (with well-thought
tests).

J.
.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Security
  - From: Maciej Katafiasz

References:
- Security
  - From: Steve-o
- Re: Security
  - From: Jeronimo Pellegrini
- Re: Security
  - From: Andrew Reilly

Prev by Date: Re: Order of macroexpansion
Next by Date: Re: Security
Previous by thread: Re: Security
Next by thread: Re: Security
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Relevant Pages

Re: Security
... input string into a number somewhere, before doing some maths on it? ... Coerce doesn't bypass type safety, ...
(comp.lang.lisp)
Re: Security
... just put some bugs in your code. ... input string into a number somewhere, before doing some maths on it? ... waiting for events from the user. ...
(comp.lang.lisp)
Re: Security
... just put some bugs in your code. ... input string into a number somewhere, before doing some maths on it? ... Easy, peasy. ...
(comp.lang.lisp)