[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Perils of Pluggability
From: |
Alfred M. Szmidt |
Subject: |
Re: The Perils of Pluggability |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:06:39 +0200 (CEST) |
> 2. extensibility and flexibility have always been an important
> goal for GNU Project's programs, as a way to give users more
> freedom; as a user, I appreciate it.
More freedom must be balanced against more vulnerability.
Not at all. There is no such thing as the freedom to force you into
doing something. So there is nothing to balance.
> Extensibility is not a synonym of vulnerability.
Of COURSE it is!
Actually, it isn't. Me extentions to vulnerable program A do not
affect you.
Running code without control where you don't know what the code
does isn't vulnerable?
What code I run is up to me, and it doesn't affect anyone else other
than me. This is what freedom means, me being able to do whatever I
aslong as what I do doesn't infringe on other peoples freedom.
- Re: The Perils of Pluggability (was: capability authentication), (continued)
- Re: The Perils of Pluggability (was: capability authentication), Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/12
- instance and instantiator, Neal H. Walfield, 2005/10/13
- Re: instance and instantiator, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/13
- Re: instance and instantiator, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/13
- Re: instance and instantiator, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/13
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/10
Re: The Perils of Pluggability,
Alfred M. Szmidt <=
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/10
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Matthieu Lemerre, 2005/10/10
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2005/10/11
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/11
Re: The Perils of Pluggability, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/10
Re: The Perils of Pluggability (was: capability authentication), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2005/10/10
Re: Capability Authentication, Marcus Völp, 2005/10/13