NODE dcd113a8Re: IBM's Microkernal
nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:22:34 +0800
Responding to msg by perry@piermont.com ("Perry E. Metzger") on
Wed, 01 Nov 11:51 AM
>Why is this being sent to cypherpunks? Its totally
>irrelevant.
It's related to IBM's work on machine/code interface security,
encryption and authentication capabilities. Cryptographers may
want to examine how these work in Microkernal. If IBM will
allow access to the features.
And it's related to parallel alarms sounded on cypherpunks
about the impossibility of any durable security which does not
anticipate ever-changing attacks devised by authors of
competing products and services.
Finally, not your hat size, to be sure, it's related to the
vanity of computer security consultants who dismiss unknown
competition at the peril of their credibility.
"The free market is a terror for tortured souls." Anonymous.
NODE 80d377b9Re: IBM's Microkernal
"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>Fri, 3 Nov 1995 17:54:46 +0800
Anonymous writes:
>
> Responding to msg by perry@piermont.com ("Perry E. Metzger") on
> Wed, 01 Nov 11:51 AM
>
> >Why is this being sent to cypherpunks? Its totally
> >irrelevant.
>
>
> It's related to IBM's work on machine/code interface security,
> encryption and authentication capabilities.
No it isn't. Its just an operating system microkernel. These typically
just provide very low level process abstractions to allow device
drivers and operating system interfaces to be built as processes. It
has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with cryptography.
I realize that the word "code" appeared in the article, but just
because the word "code" gets used doesn't mean we are talking about
cryptography.
By the way, learn how to spell "kernel".
Perry