From: hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>
To: 9front@9front.org
Subject: Re: [9front] user none: cwfs vs hjfs
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 16:01:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFSF3XOGL2B68KYpAheRvwW2GEFHan=2rSu8CZB=xcXndL6+VQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7AF49F1D-0B66-4C09-B7BA-32FB34872CAF@stanleylieber.com>
well there's a lot of truth in that joke.
and it really does look like they thought about proper security
concepts. but providing a nice basis, an OS, and making sure every
program uses it correctly are two different things.
it might be that this dissonance can be explained some other way. for
example if the people involved in making the email stuff were
different folks, who didn't know how to fit into that security
architecture.
as email has proven to be a longer-term thing after all, perhaps it's
worth fixing the broken upas assumptions so that upas fits again with
the rest of this system.
On 1/22/21, Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> On January 22, 2021 4:14:24 AM EST, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> do you seriously not follow what i'm saying here or are you just trying
>>> to
>>> map out a solution?
>>
>>i was trying to imagine out loud how the existing security
>>architecture could be utilized as fully as possible.
>>
>>i am not saying it is the best solution, just trying to stay on the
>>track that the bell-labs people have laid out.
>>
>>i am not saying we didn't break it. but if we know the intent of the
>>basic architecture we might be able to fix it without creating a
>>second system.
>>
>
> yeah, i'm with you there. i really think they just tried to sidestep this
> whole issue by stipulating anyone with fs access was trusted. remember the
> "joke" about securing the fs by locking the server room door?
>
> sl
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-22 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-19 20:16 Stanley Lieber
2021-01-19 20:36 ` hiro
2021-01-19 20:51 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-19 20:57 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-19 21:35 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-19 21:54 ` hiro
2021-01-19 21:58 ` Anthony Martin
2021-01-21 16:22 ` ori
2021-01-21 17:05 ` sirjofri
2021-01-21 17:36 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-21 22:01 ` hiro
2021-01-21 22:15 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-21 22:51 ` hiro
2021-01-21 22:55 ` hiro
2021-01-21 23:26 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-21 23:55 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-22 0:13 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-23 15:08 ` cinap_lenrek
2021-01-22 0:24 ` ori
2021-01-22 0:53 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-22 9:53 ` hiro
2021-01-22 0:10 ` Anthony Martin
2021-01-21 23:44 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-22 0:00 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-22 9:14 ` hiro
2021-01-22 14:51 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-22 15:01 ` hiro [this message]
2021-01-22 15:39 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-22 9:41 ` hiro
2021-01-21 23:00 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-21 23:08 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-19 23:04 ` Silas McCroskey
2021-01-20 1:12 ` hiro
2021-01-20 1:50 ` Stanley Lieber
2021-01-19 21:07 ` Stanley Lieber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAFSF3XOGL2B68KYpAheRvwW2GEFHan=2rSu8CZB=xcXndL6+VQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=23hiro@gmail.com \
--cc=9front@9front.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).