Blog

You call writeDump() on an ORM entity or a very rich class graph . The browser locks up. Thirty seconds later you get a page with forty thousand rows on it, you scroll for a while, you give up, and you go edit your code to dump a sub-key instead. Or worse, you crash the server.

LLM applications face a class of attack traditional input validation was never built for: prompt injection. An attacker embeds instructions in user input, a retrieved document, a web page your tool fetched, or an MCP result, trying to override your system prompt, exfiltrate data, or hijack a tool call. BoxLang AI 3.4.0 ships four layered, configurable defenses against exactly this, plus one more that's on unconditionally.

Everyone knows the datasource password should not be sitting in plain text in a config file. Everyone has also, at some point, shipped exactly that, because the alternative was a pile of environment variable plumbing that nobody wanted to build on a deadline. x

Here's a bug that's easy to miss until it bites someone in production: an agent turn asks for two tool calls at once, both need human approval, and only the first one actually suspends. The second one gets silently skipped. Not rejected, not queued, just gone. That's what happened before 3.4.0, and it's fixed now with batched tool-call approvals.

If you have an existing ColdFusion or Lucee application, one of the first questions you may have about BoxLang is probably not:

“Should I rewrite my application in BoxLang?”

It is much simpler:

“Can BoxLang run the CFML application I already have?”

That was the focus of veteran CFML troubleshooter Charlie Arehart’s session at Into the Box 2026, Getting Started with BoxLang as an Alternative CFML Engine.

HumanInTheLoopMiddleware used to do everything itself: decide which tool calls needed approval, present the request, and wait for a decision. In 3.4.0, that logic has been pulled apart into a real subsystem, and the piece developers will feel the most is that a human's "always allow this" now actually means always.

Every serious language has a way to ask "is this even parseable?" without running it. bash -n script.sh. node --check file.js. python -m py_compile. As of 1.17.0, BoxLang has one too.

Every AI agent that touches something real eventually needs a human in the loop. Someone has to approve the delete, confirm the wire transfer, or just say "go ahead" before a tool call runs. The question BoxLang AI 3.4.0 answers is: approve it how? A terminal prompt? A webhook? A Slack button?

BoxLang has always been an extensible language. As of 1.17.0, it is a hierarchically extensible one. Every module ecosystem you have worked in is flat. You declare a list of dependencies and something outside the language, a package manager or a build tool, resolves and downloads and orders them. The language itself has no opinion about the shape of the graph. It sees a list, not a tree.