> Web browsers > Email readers > Word processors > Document browsers (e.g. acrobat, xpdf, ghostview) > > All those run in a jail of sorts: the current user. What would > be nifty is a way to allow a user to make sub-users, where he can > encapsulate a program and only give write/read access to a > specific directory. Which is possible to do with any extensive > rewrites I think.
Typo: I believe you meant to write "... *without* any extensive rewrites" Correct. I do not believe so. The difference is that with a kernel I know where the kernel came from and so do a lot of other users. If the kernel screws the users, they have a decent chance to figure this out and abandon the system. Also, kernels are well known to be sources of vulnerability and they get inspected. History shows that people are not interested in hacking kernels, they hack on programs. If the opposite was true, then someone would have fixed the driver madness in Mach or improved IO access in the Hurd/Mach. And if it is a purely "academic" exercise, can you explain why KeyKOS has *never* been hacked over 25 years in production use? And yes, there have been attempts. It must be really bad if nobody has hacked on it in 25 years. But maybe you meant cracked, in that case, how do you know? You simply cannot know. _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
