Re: Programmatic and security models for IoT

On Thu, February 5, 2015 07:49, Bill Frantz wrote:
> On 2/4/15 at 9:29 PM, [email protected] (Dan Connolly) wrote:
>
>>SES (Secure EcmaScript) seems more promising, to me.
>
> Note that Mark Miller was a major mover in both E and SES. If
> you haven't read his PHD thesis
> <http://www.erights.org/talks/thesis/markm-thesis.pdf>, you
> probably should.
>
> I'm not a Javascript guy, but moving in that direction seems
> reasonable. One advantage of E is that there are fewer
> compromises with the legacy. Javascript needs to avoid breaking
> the web as it moves to become a capability platform. If you
> think in E, you won't be seduced by the parts of Javascript that
> hang around for backward compatibility.
>

I think JavaScript made some great moves in the past with their scoped
'strict' in that regard. Almost makes me wish all legacy languages
investigate scoped measures where backward compatibility is broken in
favor of better security. Hell, OS APIs could probably also do with a
'strict' subset that brakes backward compatibility in a scoped way if such
a thing is possible.
> Cheers - Bill
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Frantz        | Concurrency is hard. 12 out  | Periwinkle
> (408)356-8506      | 10 programmers get it wrong. | 16345
> Englewood Ave
> www.pwpconsult.com |                - Jeff Frantz | Los Gatos,
> CA 95032
>
> _______________________________________________
> cap-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/cap-talk
>
>