qmail is a pita to configure and use. usability is a much greater factor in adoption than security. whether you like that or not.
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Chris Palmer <snackypa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Rik Farrow <r...@rikfarrow.com> wrote: > > > And it's not how I want my car to run, or even my cell phone. Both are > > vastly more complex than qmail, but having my car decide to die while > > I am navigating during rush hour could result in people dying. > > Nobody is saying your car should stop running immediately on the first > problem. That's not how qmail works, either. Instead, errors are > logged and propagated up the call tree, and the callers keep trying. > At the top of the call tree is the human operator; but transient and > recoverable errors likely never make it up that high. > > And, yes, your cell phone (and laptop) often already does work in that > way: init spawns daemons like rild (radio interface layer daemon) and > watches to see if rild has died. > > The proposition is that things like rild should simplify by relying on > the interface guarantee of init ("I will restart you"), rather than > going through contortions (that are themselves likely to create more > bugs or operational mishaps) to try to repair. > > This is explained the crash-only paper; nobody is saying "Go ahead and > let people die every time write(2) gets EINTR." > > > -- > http://noncombatant.org/ > _______________________________________________ > langsec-discuss mailing list > langsec-discuss@mail.langsec.org > https://mail.langsec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/langsec-discuss >
_______________________________________________ langsec-discuss mailing list langsec-discuss@mail.langsec.org https://mail.langsec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/langsec-discuss