Talk:Code Access Security

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Computer security: Computing Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer securityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer securityTemplate:WikiProject Computer securityComputer security

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

Things you can help WikiProject Computer security with:

Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information...

Review importance and quality of existing articles
Identify categories related to Computer Security
Tag related articles
Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests)
Identify articles for improvement
Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc.
Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

Computing: Software / CompSci

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Microsoft: .NET

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject .NET (assessed as Mid-importance).

Comment

Could someone please clearify that CAS / CLR is not a sandbox due to the verifier being incomplete / inexact by design? And that the class-library is not reference-safe? The last change was reverted due to lack of clear examples.

Or could someone post any reference to Microsoft claiming that .NET/CLR would be a sandbox at all? Until then, one should at least remove that claim.

Here you go: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnlong/html/wpfsecuritysandbox.asp

Microsoft has noted that the CLR verifier sometimes rejects safe code as unsafe but I haven't seen any documented claim that it accepts unsafe code as safe.

Leotohill 01:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong names vs. Signatures

Strong names as evidence are not the same thing as X.509 certificate signatures---strong names can be generated from self-created private keys, for instance. See http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163583.aspx for an example of the difference. Certificates and signatures are a much more involved (and effective) security measure, the entry should probably distinguish them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.99.81 (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete technology?

I think CAS has been obsolete for some time now. See the comments on Microsoft's page here [1]: "CAS is not supported in .NET Core, .NET 5, or later versions. CAS is not supported by versions of C# later than 7.0" -- plus other warnings about not using it. Equinox ◑ 20:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]