[11587] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Palladium and buffer over runs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bear)
Fri Aug 30 15:17:59 2002
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: bear <bear@sonic.net>
To: "John S. Denker" <jsd@monmouth.com>
Cc: Frank Andrew Stevenson <frank@funcom.com>,
<cryptography@wasabisystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <3D6E87B6.72A6526B@monmouth.com>
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, John S. Denker wrote:
>bear wrote:
>> Given that, I think a cracker could subvert IE normally, but that
>> wouldn't result in any access to the protected space of any other
>> applications. And as long as IE is actually separate from your
>> OS (if you're running it on your Mac, or under WINE from Linux,
>> for example), it shouldn't give him/her access to anything
>> inside the OS.
>
>Oh, but aren't you forgetting that You-Know-Who testified
>under oath that it is necessary for IE to be an integral part
>of the operating system. ;-)
No, I wasn't forgetting that. But that doesn't make it
any less silly.
Sigh. It may be the case that laws are really a bad idea,
because they seem to make so many people feel that they are
obligated to say things that just aren't true.
Unfortunately, I don't have any better ideas on how to create
an orderly and capable society. For a while I was thinking
cryptographic protocols based on provables, self-interest,
and the laws of mathematics (which are relatively constant
and unbiased) might be a superior organizing principle for a
society to laws. Under careful scrutiny and after acquiring
a better understanding of protocol design, however, I
concluded that such a society has probably as many problems
(opportunities for tyranny and oppression) as the current
nation-state concept. Its only definite advantage might be
lower legal fees.
Bear
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
