Not so fast (re: "The lost resolution bug isn't")

David-Sarah Hopwood <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.e.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
<http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/The_lost_resolution_bug_isn%27t>

# Lost resolution: If VatA has a far (resolved) reference to Carol in VatC,
# and sends a message to Bob in VatB containing that reference, then it will
# arrive as a remote promise (for the result of a nonce-lookup sent to VatC)
# rather than a far ref.
#
# The plan to fix this was to introduce the WormholeOp, which would allow
# VatA to send to VatB the (encrypted) messages it wanted to arrive at VatC
# before the messages from Bob to Carol (preserving E-order).
#
# However, given that we want all far refs to the same object to be ==, and
# we want == objects to be absolutely indistinguishable, and that something
# in VatB has a reference to Carol, Bob would necessarily receive the
# existing far reference to Carol,

Yes...

# and Bob, possibly with the collusion of VatB (not delivering the
# WormholeOp traffic, or delaying it), can then violate E-order by sending
# messages too soon.

... but the alternative solution to the lost resolution bug described in

<http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2009-January/012067.html>
<http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2009-January/012068.html>

is able to prevent this, I think.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

_______________________________________________
e-lang mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/e-lang
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.