Re: seL4, L4.sec and coyotos mess

[Tom Bachmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gustavo Romero wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> There seems to be several L4 successors  with security in mind.

Yes.

> Is there
> a comparison between them in any place?

I'm not aware of any.

> Coyotos web said there is some
> similarities with l4.sec. Again... is there any place with a comparison?
> Can somebody help see the light? :)
> 

You could read what is available of information (sadly, the L4
successors aren't developed in such an open fashion like coyotos):
http://www.coyotos.org/docs/ukernel/spec.html
http://l4hq.org/docs/manuals/l4_sec_20051019.pdf and
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/papers_ps/kauer-diplom.pdf
http://i30www.ira.uka.de/teaching/coursedocuments/105/l4ng-apr28.pdf

> This may be not the right list to make these questions but... I think
> some of you  had done this comparison between  kernels to  be able to
> choose one of them as a basis for the hurd.
> 

First of all, you should know that no kernel has been chosen yet.
The reasons for concentrating most on coyotos are more pragmatically,
AIUI: it is hoped coyotos will be usable sooner, coyotos is developed
more openly, and jonathan has a lot of experiance wrt capability systems
he offered to share.
- --
- -ness-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFErp+SvD/ijq9JWhsRAoi7AJ4pOqUvyjeVmsBABoRop+RzLt+s+ACeOsQE
sPMuiTCX37wRy/6vOr4/q/8=
=0wQ4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----