Re: Who to hold responsible (was: Re: MarkM answer: RATS, DCCS, and membranes for network capabilities)

Pubshare, of which there is a youtube video, has unforgeable responsibility
tracking without Horton.

--marcs
On Jan 15, 2015 12:21 PM, "David Barbour" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Jed Donnelley <capability-iCFHVraI1K1Wk0Htik3J/[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> How do you believe "traditional" capability-based systems can know "who
>> to hold responsible for" an action (without something like Horton)?
>>
>
> Even without Horton, it isn't difficult to model fine-grained who-done-it
> capabilities. Consider an OO interface that takes an extra argument
> regarding who did the deed for logging purposes:
>
>   interface O {
>     method m (whoPath, normalArgs)
>   }
>
> A simple way to attenuate this interface, then, is to extend the whoPath
> in some way. For example, I could create one attenuation that adds 'Alan
> Karp' to the path, and another that adds 'Jed Donnelley', and pass these
> respectively through your e-mails. You, in turn, might attenuate the
> interface further when you pass the capability to people with whom you are
> working or similar.
>
> Variations on this can be useful for the powerbox pattern, i.e. such that
> users reliably see something like
> "MainWindow.FrameLeft.FrameTop.Advertisement1 is asking for access to your
> sound output. Grant or Deny?". Thus, this pattern isn't necessarily
> specific to tracking responsibility for users.
>
> Granted, this approach isn't nearly so robust as Horton. But it is
> lightweight, effective, and preserves POLA.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cap-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/cap-talk
>
>

_______________________________________________
cap-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/cap-talk