Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Workers
(January 1998)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Taboo question
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs @ hpc . uh . edu>
Date: 30 Jan 1998 12:34:58 -0600
To: majordomo-workers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: tneff@panix.com's message of Fri, 30 Jan 1998 06:55:46 -0500
References: <199801301155.GAA19961@panix.com>

>>>>> "TN" == Tom Neff <tneff@panix.com> writes:

TN> Frankly I think that the best of all worlds would be to add something
TN> like

But you're already amazingly close to what's already there!  For efficiency
and all around better code the access check routines don't get the entire
message; instead the taboo matches are saved and the severities are passed
into the access routines along with variables containing the state of all
of the other transgressions.  And you do have a simple language that lets
you do the logical connectives and such.

TN> Unfortunately there are security issues here that would make taboo_eval
TN> useful only for "friendly" sites.

My scheme does not have that problem because the language is "compiled"
into perl instead of being perl itself, and I have taken rather strict
security precautions.  To Majordomo, there can be no such thing as a
"friendly" site; all list admins must be treated with the same amount of
mistrust.

TN> A simpler fallback that does what Jason wants would be to extend the
TN> syntax of 'taboo' strings to allow one or more flags at the end:

But it's already been implemented that way!  I'm just asking about one
final bit of semantics.  (The current additional flags are line limit and
severity.)

 - J<


References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Taboo question
From: tneff@panix.com (Tom Neff)
Next: install
From: James Pavlic <james.pavlic@shilohcc.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Taboo question
From: tneff@panix.com (Tom Neff)
Next: Re: Taboo question
From: "Brian L. Heess" <dmbong@commline.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com