Re: Arbitrary Sandbox

["Thomas Løcke" <tl@ada-dk.org>]

On 02/10/2012 10:32 AM, Rob Shea wrote:
>
> Only some applications need to be handled in this way, as they are
> developed (hence the arbitrary requirement) while other applications
> require all the normal abilities, like network access and file system
> writing.



Then simply run more guests, with differing setups and permissions.

Honestly, it sounds like you guys are trying to reinvent the wheel.

Virtualization today is cheap and easy, so unless you specifically need
to run on bare metal, I fail to see why you would ever want to invent
your own sandbox environment. This has already been done to death by a
bunch of very skilled and knowledgable people.

By using some of the existing technologies you get the added benefit of
snapshots, cloning and a very fine grained control over what hardware
the guest sees.



>
> Thank you for the suggestion though, it would make life a bit easier,
> but alas not appropriate here.



Obviously I've no idea what you're actually trying to accomplish or what
your final goals are, but as soon as I read this:

"The idea is a Windows test station sandbox where arbitrary
applications can be executed, but cannot make system changes or
transmit data"

Then I'm instantly thinking: Already solved, by every single
virtualization product out there.

Unless there's more to your product than what you've described, I
honestly think you'd be doing yourself a disservice by trying to come
up with a homegrown solution.

If you're trying to build walls around unsafe programs inside Windows,
I believe you're setting yourself up for failure.

But if this is what you want to do, then you should obviously go with
Ada, simply because it was created with safety and security in mind. I
don't know of any other language where this is the case.

Good luck!  :o)

-- 
Thomas L�cke | thomas@12boo.net | http://12boo.net