Re: [cap-talk] Non-Delegatable Authorities in Capability Systems

On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 02:23 +0000, Toby Murray wrote:
> The property that I'm after is that, when A invokes B, that B always has
> the final say about the results returned to A.
> 
> At first glance, it appears that one needs to disallow (at least) the
> keywords
> 
> method
> escape

Oops. I forgot to mention that one would also want to disallow use of
names defined by the expansion rules. The obvious one that comes to mind
is, of course, '__return'.

> 
> and stipulate that each vat runs a single turn only (in order to cover
> the case you pointed out in which one delegates a resolver and returns
> the corresponding promise). 
> 
> Would that be enough?

Would this, now, be enough to enforce the property?