Le Vendredi 7 Octobre 2005 15:32, Jonathan S. Shapiro a écrit : > On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 13:05 +0200, Simon Nieuviarts wrote: > > I don't know the typical probability of a logical gate to erroneously > > flipping a bit. > > It depends on the wattage of the hair dryer you point at it. > > A paper was published two years ago investigating hairdryer-induced heat > for the Java security model. The outcome is quite bad, and it appears to > apply to runtime-based security in general. The bad part isn't the hair > dryer. The bad part is that a single bit error is enough to compromise > the entire runtime-based security model. > > Random particle hits generate single bit errors in your computer several > times a year.
I hurts me to know that. Thanks for the info. > > But I consider that if the the probability of such an hardware error > > is higher than the probability of a false sparsity match, then relying on > > this sparsity may be a right choice. > > Hopefully, my previous note will lead you to reconsider this. It does. We do not need to add sources of insecurity. Simon. _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
