On 25-May-02 08:58:26 Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: WV> On Sat, 25 May 2002, Fabian Sturm wrote: >> > I think your idea that a GNU System shouldn't allow the sysadmin >> > to limit the freedoms of the users is pretty ridiculous.
[snip] >> I really get mad when I hear that the sysadmin owns the machine and >> pays for its used resources. [snip] WV> Remember that every story has two sides. WV> If a sysadmin allows too many freedoms to a user, you're likely WV> to end up in big problems. [snip] Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the design goal of the Hurd such that it allows freedoms via isolation? Meaning I can create my own little world and allow who ever I want to enter and I can even limit what all they can do in my world. And they in turn can do the same with their world. I'm protected from screwing around with the hurd core via servers. The servers being the insulation that if they or one of them fails the core keeps on keeping on and I can just start up another instance of the server(s). The hurd core being the existance that allows things/worlds to exist in it's (the Hurd) existance. You can mess around in your world, and in other worlds to the extent you've been allowed by the owners of those worlds, even distroy them if so given the power and desire to do so. But you cannot mess with existance itself. Being able to make custom worlds means that it is harder for someone to make a generic attack on many worlds. As for the "commons" resources, if you want to alter something you have to make a copy of it and placed in your world. Sysadmin main task is maintaining and upgrading existance so that all which exist in existance works better or has the option of. Everyone knows the only completely secure system is one that can't be altered at all. But that is not the design goal of the Hurd, rather it is a design goal of core, worlds and common resource isolation so as to provide stability of existance while allowing differing worlds to co-exist to the level of security as desired by world owners/creators. While in all of this allowing a sharing of values between the worlds. Let's say there is one world called "teamwork" where the work of many coders is copied/collected and processed for a team goal. Lets' further say that one person turns bad and causes the teamwork world to collapse and turn into a black hole. Due to the isolation, the black hole can only vainish the teamwork world, not the worlds and their works that contributed to it. Recreating the teamwork world without the blackhole seed is as easy as again collecting contribution copies from the many worlds, minus the seed world or black hole seed in that world. Again, correct me if I'm wrong about this. --- Timothy Rue Email @ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
