[4720] in WWW Security List Archive
RE: Latest Java hole is Netscape/Sun only
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thomas Reardon)
Fri Mar 7 22:55:53 1997
From: Thomas Reardon <thomasre@microsoft.com>
To: "'Bob Denny'" <rdenny@dc3.com>,
"'WWW Security List'"
<WWW-SECURITY@ns2.rutgers.edu>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:29:50 -0800
Errors-To: owner-www-security@ns2.rutgers.edu
Then let me make my own opinion known. First, Java still doesn't have
signing, other than announcement-ware. Sun, Netscape, Microsot and
others are working to address that.
As for your "who+what" assertion: The idea of capabilities-based-trust
is a complication, not a simplication for end-users. That is, once you
decide that you will depend on a trust-based system then that becomes
the anchor for your security model, its not really complemented by the
sandbox anymore. Sandboxes are great for *untrusted code*. And ActiveX
is absolutely only good for *trusted* code (where trusted code is
written&deployed within the firewall, or across the firewall via
identifiable publishers).
IMO.
-Thomas
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Denny [SMTP:rdenny@dc3.com]
>Sent: Friday, March 07, 1997 4:23 PM
>To: 'WWW Security List'
>Subject: Re: Latest Java hole is Netscape/Sun only
>
>On Mar 7, Thomas Reardon (Microsoft) wrote:
>> Subject: Latest Java hole is Netscape/Sun only
>> http://www.microsoft.com/security/
>>
>> just a quick note that the VM bug affects only Netscape and Sun
>> implementations. that means IE for Windows is ok, but IE for Mac (Sun's
>> VM) is vulnerable. we're off the hook for once this week ;)
>
>I just had to say this... the hole found in Java exposes Java to the level of
>capability control that is intrinsic in ActiveX, nothing. Now that Java has
>code signing, it has both parts of a real security policy, the who _and_ the
>what. ActiveX has only the who.
>
> -- Bob
