RE: L4, High Assurance, and Protection

[Volkmar Uhlig]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hermann Härtig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 11:07 AM
> 
> BTW, the perception that Jochen Liedtke considered speed to dominate 
> everything else (see some earlier email) is simply rubbish. 
> Jonathan's statement "that performance cannot be used to justify 
> fundamental insecurity" could as well originate from Jochen Liedtke.

The hitserver is an example where this perception is not rubbish (as you phrased it).

The point I tried to make is that if you want generality of the kernel you have to 
look at a wide area of applications.  As I stated in previous emails, I'm aware of the 
insufficiencies of the security model in L4 and I believe that this is well taken care 
of by many people looking at.  The same is not true for the performance aspects and my 
feeling is that "all these important security features" are used to fatten and to slow 
the kernel unreasonably.

Since you referred to Jochen here a quote from "Improving IPC by kernel design":
        "IPC performance is the Master.  Anything which may lead to higher IPC 
performance has to be discussed. In case of doubt, decisions in favor of IPC have to 
be taken. But the performance and security qualities of other components must not be 
seriously impacted."

So far there is no sound model proposed which doesn't add significant overhead and 
which has the same elegance as L4 today.

- Volkmar

_______________________________________________
l4-hackers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers