Capabilities workshop, followup questions

[User Datagram Protocol]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 06:25:41AM +1000, Jon Tidswell wrote:
> 
> < .. on fork() vs threads ... >
> 
> I think the argument Bart is making is that two threads sharing an address
> space necessarily share a security context.

And that's my boogaboo w.r.t Java security. Not directly relevant to this
discussion, I agree, but some of the work IBM's been doing lately raises
the question: just how secure is their role-based security in their scalable
Java server systems?

Gotta do more reading around this. I'm majorly in jobhunt mode at the moment,
have a KICKASS agent (she knows what buffer overflows are), so I'll try
and contribute later.

Hi to Rob and awr (this is me delurking)

-- 
Bruce M. Simpson aka 'udp'       Security Analyst & UNIX Development Engineer
                                            WWW: www.closed-networks.com/~udp 
Dundee                                             www.packetfactory.net/~udp
United Kingdom                            email:      udp at closed-networks.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 248 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/trustedbsd-discuss/attachments/20000620/93491373/attachment.bin