RE: SecurityManager troubles

[Jeroen Frijters]

Gary Benson wrote:
> Guilhem Lavaux wrote:
> > 3) One solution of the problem is to load some core classes. But it
> > will appear quite soon that some other classes may also be loaded
> > for really wicked applications. It is a limitative solution and I
> > would not support it.
> 
> Yes.  Exactly which classes need loading depends on exactly what your
> custom checkPermission is doing.  We can, of course, make sure we have
> the classes we need for the default checkPermission, but that doesn't
> seem complete somehow.

I must say that I don't understand this problem. Shouldn't the boot
class loader be able to load classes regardless of the SecurityManager?
It would seem to me that VMs that can't do that are broken and that this
is not a Classpath problem.

Regards,
Jeroen