[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Restricted storage
From: |
Pierre THIERRY |
Subject: |
Re: Restricted storage |
Date: |
Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 |
Scribit Jonathan S. Shapiro dies 30/05/2006 hora 10:04:
> Read permission on capabilities implies transitive write permission.
OK. Would it be possible then to have to sets of permissions:
read/write, read-only and nothing for data pages, and read and nothing
for capability pages?
> > I wonder if a write notice flag could be interesting. [...]
> This notice generally comes too late to be any good -- the horse has
> already left the barn.
I was fearing to come to that conclusion...
> Also, it requires dynamic monitoring that is generally agreed to be
> too expensive in practice. A comparable technique has sometimes been
> used to handle dynamic security level tainting in MLS systems.
For he sake of my curiosity, would the removable proxy idea I sketched
before be possible in Coyotos? Would it still be too expensive that way?
> > Then again, this breaks Flexibility.
> I have seen several references to the "Flexibility" design goal. Is
> this goal described somewhere?
http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Hurd/RequirementsForUser#FlexibilityRequirement
Curiously,
Nowhere man
--
address@hidden
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Restricted storage, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2006/05/29
Re: Restricted storage, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2006/05/30