[DGD] Static functions, static AUTO functions, access

[Felix A. Croes]

Noah Gibbs <noah_gibbs at yahoo.com> wrote:

>   I think I may have answered my own question.  It
> appears that the extra AUTO object is simply
> #included, not actually inherited.  In that case, the
> object that receives it would still be able to use the
> regular ::read_file() syntax with the usual results. 
> Seems like I need to rethink my scripting strategy.
>
>   And here I thought I was being all clever.

It's not included, it's inherited from an include file.  What would be
the point of a second-tier auto object that is merely included? :)

As long as you mask every function you want to protect, you're fine.
There is one thing to be careful about, however.  Theoretically, an
object could explicitly inherit the auto object:

    inherit auto "/kernel/lib/auto";

    string unprotected_read_file(string file, varargs int offset, int size)
    {
	return auto::read_file(file, offset, size);
    }

The kernel library prevents this by letting only System objects inherit
explicitly from /kernel/lib.  But once you have more than one second-tier
auto object, you have to make sure that an object intended to inherit one
cannot explicitly inherit the other, and get a mix of security models
that way.

Regards,
Dworkin
_________________________________________________________________
List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd