Re: Medium Level Trust and Reflection

From: Shawn Farkas [MS] (shawnfa_at_online.microsoft.com)
Date: 02/26/05


Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:49:43 GMT

Hi Paul,

Looks correct to me :-) Although you won't need Assertion permission if
you go route b, since, if I understand your scenario correctly, you no
longer will need to Assert any permissions.

-Shawn
http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnfa
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
 

Note:
For the benefit of the community-at-large, all responses to this message
are best directed to the newsgroup/thread from which they originated.
--------------------
> From: "Paul Hatcher" <phatcher@spamless.cix.co.uk>
> References: <Oy8Y4M1GFHA.2744@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>
<u3y8$I4GFHA.3352@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>
<#1XfeZ4GFHA.3088@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>
<#zmyks4GFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>
<#VfQqN5GFHA.3272@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>
> Subject: Re: Medium Level Trust and Reflection
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 00:54:08 -0000
> Lines: 77
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.224
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.224
> Message-ID: <#vGgt25GFHA.2860@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.dotnet.security
> NNTP-Posting-Host: lan2.phatch.adsl.alcom.co.uk 212.47.82.102
> Path:
TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP1
2.phx.gbl
> Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.dotnet.security:9248
> X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.dotnet.security
>
> Is this correct...
>
> 1. Assert the Reflection permission declaratively in the code.
> a.. Place the assembly in the GAC
> or
> b. Modify the web_mediumtrust.config to grant Assertion and Reflect
> permission based on the strong name
>
> Paul
>
>
> "Joe Kaplan (MVP - ADSI)" <joseph.e.kaplan@removethis.accenture.com> wrote
> in message news:#VfQqN5GFHA.3272@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > That's pretty much what I thought. I wasn't sure if the code he was
> calling
> > that demanded the Reflection permission did a full demand or not, so I
> > thought he should probably know about Assert as well, just in case.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Joe K.
> >
> > "Nicole Calinoiu" <calinoiu REMOVETHIS AT gmail DOT com> wrote in
message
> > news:%23zmyks4GFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > Depends on whether the code that's being called makes a link demand or
> > > full demand. If it's a full demand, then an assertion will be
required,
> > > but assertion permission can be acquired by the same means as
reflection
> > > permission.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Joe Kaplan (MVP - ADSI)" <joseph.e.kaplan@removethis.accenture.com>
> wrote
> > > in message news:%231XfeZ4GFHA.3088@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > >> Won't he need to assert the permissions he's using to if he wants to
> > >> prevent a stack walk? That would apply in either situation (GAC or
> > >> non-GAC) if his assembly had permissions that the rest of the
> application
> > >> did not by default, right?
> > >>
> > >> Joe K.
> > >>
> > >> "Nicole Calinoiu" <calinoiu REMOVETHIS AT gmail DOT com> wrote in
> message
> > >> news:u3y8$I4GFHA.3352@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > >>> Have you tried adding it to the GAC? Did it work? If so, would you
> > >>> stiff
> > >>> prefer an alternate approach? For example, you might try to alter
the
> > >>> web_mediumtrust.config to grant additional permissions to your
> assembly
> > >>> based on its
> > >>> strong name.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> "Paul Hatcher" <phatcher@spamless.cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >>> news:Oy8Y4M1GFHA.2744@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > >>>> Is there any way of granting a specific assembly Reflection
> permission
> > >>>> when
> > >>>> the web server is set to Medium level trust? The assembly is
signed
> > >>>> and
> > >>>> may
> > >>>> be placed in the GAC if necessary
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Paul
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>