[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Supporting POSIX *users*

From: Christopher Nelson
Subject: RE: Supporting POSIX *users*
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 12:27:46 -0700

>    > No, it is the fault of the user.  Take a capability based system,
>    > I give all programs the same capabilities, so it works like it
>    > does on a normal system, who is at fault?  The system architect
>    > for giving the user the ability to set the capabilities?
>    Absolutely. There is no conceivable justification for this bad
>    design, and no functional requirement for it.
> So what you are saying is that I shouldn't be able to do the 
> above in a `properly desgined system'? You'll make me laugh 
> quite hard if you answer yes... Cause it sounds awfully like 
> treachours computing, where someone else dictates what I can 
> do on/with my machine.

A properly designed system makes it very difficult for an ignorant
person to shoot themselves in the foot.  A properly designed gun does
not shoot with the safety on.  In reality it is impossible to keep
someone from disabling a safety, but deliberately designing a gun so
that you can disable the functionality of the safety is absurd.  Why put
a safety on the gun in the first place?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]