This page is likely outdated. Visit the new documentation for updated content.

This how to is intended for people who have read about coreclr on MSDN, MS employees blogs, Mono’s wiki and how this applies to Moonlight. Once the concepts are understood then you’re ready to learn how to enable this feature for your own needs.

So what’s needed ? Simply a host (full trusted), some platform assemblies (partially trusted code) and applications (untrusted).


Hosting sounds scary ? It’s not, at least coreclr-wise and it is likely your simplest step.

  1. Embed Mono into your application;
  2. Enable CoreCLR (which also enables the verifier) with a call to mono_security_enable_core_clr; and
  3. Provide your own callback to mono_security_set_core_clr_platform_callback to determine if an assembly is to be considered as platform code (return TRUE) or not (return FALSE).
static gboolean
is_platform_code (const char *image_name)
   // insert your own logic, returning TRUE
   // will allow everything as platform code
   return TRUE;

void enable_core_clr ()
   mono_security_enable_core_clr ();
   mono_security_set_core_clr_platform_callback (is_platform_code);

However the usefulness of a coreclr host is limited by your own platform assemblies (just like a JIT would not be helpful without class libraries) and your applications. Also keep in mind that access to some features (e.g. cross-domain web access, sockets…) are not related to coreclr.


You can find both a very (i.e. too) simple and very (i.e. totally) complete samples in Mono’s GIT repositories.


If you look at mono command-line options (i.e. ‘man mono’) you’ll notice a –security option that accept a core-clr parameter. So it’s there (feature wise) and it’s not (what you likely want). Still you can see coreclr being enabled in driver.c and the default platform code detection, allowing only mscorlib.dll, in security-core-clr.c.

This means mscorlib.dll is the only assembly that can do critical stuff (and that includes defining safe critical methods). You can guess that this is severely limited with the default framework profiles. Remember that no FX profile, even 4.0, is designed to work with only coreclr/transparency.

As such this host, unless you provide your own mscorlib.dll or wish to hack a custom mono, is not really usable in real-life scenarios. However it does show that creating a host and enabled coreclr are not difficult tasks. Also this mono option is very useful to test the runtime under coreclr (e.g. it’s used daily for running fuzz-ed code).


Moonlight, Mono’s open source Silverlight implemention, is a complete, real-life and usable, coreclr host.

Note: Moonlight isn’t actively developed anymore. If you’re feeling adventurous you can probably get it working by compiling from source, but we recommend you move away from Moonlight as soon as possible.

Being a web browser plugin this may looks like a very different hosting scenario - and it is in many cases. But from a coreclr point of view things are very similar the earlier, generic code sample.

In the following source code you can see:

  1. coreclr being enabled; and
  2. platform assemblies being defined as specific assembly names inside a specific directory under the plugin installation directory;

Note that this is the most complete sample you can get and it comes with a set of platform assemblies that is being periodically audited.

Platform Assemblies

The usefulness of any platform is what it allow you to do. This is why mono as a host is very not useful (with the existing profiles) while Moonlight is for web applications.

But what are they ? Simply they are the only assemblies that can do critical operations, e.g. unsafe code, pinvoke… so this is where you’ll end up providing safe conduits to critical operations, policy decisions…

Note that all platform assemblies are running under partial trust. This means that all code is transparent (untrusted) unless it is decorated with either [SecurityCritical] or [SecuritySafeCritical] attributes.


So what kind of profile should/can be provided ? Here’s a few, simple to complex, suggestions:

  1. Use the Moonlight profile as-is. It is well tested, supported and audited;
  2. Use a subset of Moonlight. With a little extra work you can all the benefits of the above and a smaller footprint (which likely improves your security since it reduce the surface); or
  3. Define your own profile from scratch. You’re not totally on your own since Moonlight provides several tools and guidance. However this can be a huge undertaking since you’ll need to ensure your profile is secure and does not open doors that would circumvent coreclr.


This is the user, untrusted, code on which coreclr will enforce the transparency model. No compromise, from the verifier then coreclr, will be made. Note that [SecurityCritical] or [SecuritySafeCritical] attributes will be ignored inside application code.

Any failure to provide the right attributes (or policies) from platform code can lead to vulnerabilities.


The above describe how the transparency model is applied in coreclr. However it’s hard to define a complete, useful profile using only attributes that allow/disallow code execution.


How can coreclr be used to allow opening TCP sockets between 4502-4534 ?

Short answer: it cannot.

Long answer: Such checks are done by code based on policies (not coreclr). This means the socket code must be transparent (or safe critical) and provide it’s own policy decision (e.g. a range check on the requested port). While CAS allowed complex policies to be defined, the one used by Moonlight are more strictly defined (e.g. TCP and a subset between 4502-4534). Of course your own host can define it’s own policy.

Policy-driven examples (from Moonlight):

  • socket port restrictions
  • cross domain restrictions (scheme, ports, …)


Q: Is CoreCLR new in [Moon Silver]light 2+ ?

A: Somewhat. CoreCLR is heavily based on the transparency model which was introduced in .NET 2.0. However in the regular framework the transparency model is used in conjunction with CAS (and the later is not supported on Mono).

Q: Does CoreCLR provides all the security for [Moon Silver]light ?

A: Not quite. It’s a bit like saying “CAS == stack walk”. Stack walks are an important part of CAS but, without all the other parts, would not provide any security. In this case coreclr enforce the security attributes in the platform code (along with a few other rules) but some other features are policy-based (e.g. cross-domain web access, socket support…)