Re: OT: protection in SASOS

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 16:53 +0200, Espen Skoglund wrote:
> [Jonathan S Shapiro]
> > Fundamentally, a SASOS abandons the idea of a process-private
> > namespace, and reduces all addresses to global names.
> 
> > Contrast this with the current situation in L4, where an
> > *overwhelming* effort is being made to *eliminate* global names
> > because of severe security issues.
> 
> I'd strike the "*overwhelming*" part of what you say here.
> Eliminating global names is actually proven quite easy.  Further,
> perhaps an even stronger motivation to do so besides security has been
> to better facilitate features such as, migration, checkpointing, etc.
> 
>       eSk

You are absolutely correct. The word "overwhelming" was not appropriate
here.

>From the outside, it does appear to me that L4.sec is a substantial
change relative to L4, but it probably looks that way for Coyotos also,
it it really isn't true for either system.

Thanks for the reminder!

shap