From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,af0c6ea85f3ed92d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.74.201 with SMTP id w9mr3353018pbv.0.1328866449134;
        Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:34:09 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 wr5ni8112pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Rob Shea <zzycatch@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Arbitrary Sandbox
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:32:18 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <e07915da-7d7d-45c8-9001-60843347ccf5@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <8e83f2be-c6e9-4b0b-b53c-d50fe70d01e1@pq6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
 <jh25oo$lsl$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <b413fd6c-dc65-4b85-8126-6d9704c2e3c5@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
 <4f34b6d6$0$292$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 114.76.94.142
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328866449 19752 127.0.0.1 (10 Feb 2012 09:34:09
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:34:09 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: 6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=114.76.94.142;
 posting-account=3Ly23AoAAABzcQBzLiIXe1WPOFNRSfDG
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALENKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0,gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-02-10T01:32:18-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


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.

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

Cheers,

Rob

On Feb 10, 5:19=A0pm, Thomas L=F8cke <t...@ada-dk.org> wrote:
> On 02/10/2012 05:41 AM, Rob Shea wrote:
>
> I have to ask: Why not just virtualize these Windows boxes? Run them
> read-only using something like QEMU/KVM or VirtualBox? They both have
> a feature where all changes made to the guest OS is written to an image
> of your own choice, or simply take a snapshot when starting the OS, do
> your stuff and rollback when shutting the guest down.
>
> This is a standard feature in most virtualization solutions.
>
> Or do you have some special needs where the Windows machine _must_
> run on bare metal?
>
> --
> Thomas L=F8cke | tho...@12boo.net |http://12boo.net