From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 42b36c309b78180b7e96572bac310d02b82ec5dd6970a7187c6fa7366e94056a
Message ID: <v02120d23adcb9961b2ce@[192.0.2.1]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-24 22:37:41 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 06:37:41 +0800
From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 06:37:41 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Runtime info flow in Java
Message-ID: <v02120d23adcb9961b2ce@[192.0.2.1]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 20:06 5/23/96, Norman Hardy wrote:
>I am interested in your paper because you define the problem as we do.
>There are some who think that capability architectures are the solution.
>There is little information on how to solve these problems with
>capabilities. I am trying to find time to address some of these issues.
I walked away from your presentation of KeyKOS with the impression that a
capability system to be secure it would have to be implemented at the OS
level.
Can you build a such a system on top of an insecure OS, as Java would have
to do?
TIA,
Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer.
-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
PGP encrypted mail preferred.
Return to May 1996
Return to “shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)”
1996-05-24 (Sat, 25 May 1996 06:37:41 +0800) - Re: Runtime info flow in Java - shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)