gmane.comp.capabilities.general archive

386 archived articles, newest first (page 1 of 4). Latest articles →

Reasoning about Object Capabilities using Logical Relations and Effect Parametricity
Thu, 24 Mar 2016 11:57:16 +0100
Dominique Devriese <[email protected]> • #15047
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Tue, 22 Mar 2016 23:05:08 -0700
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15046
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:11:20 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15045
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:10:06 -0500
David Nicol <[email protected]> • #15044
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Sun, 20 Mar 2016 16:02:14 -0700
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15043
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Sun, 20 Mar 2016 12:38:59 -0700
Mike Stay <[email protected]> • #15042
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Sun, 20 Mar 2016 00:16:44 -0700
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15041
Fwd: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Sat, 19 Mar 2016 11:55:57 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15040
Re: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:44:15 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15039
Re: TIL: all exceptions before the commit point
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:19:35 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15038
Re: TIL: all exceptions before the commit point
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:18:13 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15037
TIL: all exceptions before the commit point
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 21:15:36 -0500
Dan Connolly <[email protected]> • #15036
Re: Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:34:39 -0500
David Nicol <[email protected]> • #15035
Fwd: Draft Proposed Standard SES (Secure EcmaScript)
Fri, 18 Mar 2016 16:24:55 -0700
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15034
Password security on unencrypted channels
Sat, 5 Mar 2016 20:34:42 -0600
David Nicol <[email protected]> • #15033
Is Polkit (nearly) a powerbox?
Sun, 28 Feb 2016 19:09:07 -0600
Dan Connolly <[email protected]> • #15032
Fwd: [Caja] Object capability success story in Mozilla
Sat, 20 Feb 2016 17:30:17 -0800
Mark Miller <[email protected]> • #15031
Re: Are capabilities becoming mainstream?
Sat, 20 Feb 2016 10:28:43 -0800
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15030
Re: Unix domain sockets and MAC confined processes as (object) capability system?
Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:54:05 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #15029
Re: Unix domain sockets and MAC confined processes as (object) capability system?
Thu, 18 Feb 2016 23:19:50 -0800
Bill Frantz <[email protected]> • #15028
Unix domain sockets and MAC confined processes as (object) capability system?
Fri, 19 Feb 2016 08:04:41 +0100
rmeijer <rmeijer-qWit8jRvyhVmR6Xm/[email protected]> • #15027
Are capabilities becoming mainstream?
Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:35:57 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #15026
Re: Capability allegories
Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:11:12 +1100
William ML Leslie <[email protected]> • #15025
Re: Capability allegories
Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:31:02 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15024
Re: Capability allegories
Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:53:40 +1100
William ML Leslie <[email protected]> • #15023
Re: Capability allegories
Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:36:22 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15022
Re: Capability allegories
Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:23:00 -0800
"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> • #15021
Capability allegories
Tue, 2 Feb 2016 10:00:19 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15020
Why it's to hard to explain capabilities to security professionals?
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 11:52:53 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #15019
Yikes
Sat, 30 Jan 2016 11:46:17 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15018
Re: cap patterns in 1ml
Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:35:30 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15017
Re: cap patterns in 1ml
Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:17:00 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15016
Re: cap patterns in 1ml
Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:19:18 -0800
Raoul Duke <[email protected]> • #15015
Re: cap patterns in 1ml
Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:48:13 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15014
Re: Secure email
Thu, 21 Jan 2016 01:15:56 -0800
Jed Donnelley <capability-iCFHVraI1K1Wk0Htik3J/[email protected]> • #15013
Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:11:33 -0500
Sandro Magi <[email protected]> • #15012
Re: [SPAM] Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:14:00 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #15011
Re: cap patterns in 1ml
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 19:45:24 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15010
First beta MattockFS
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:52:06 +0100
rmeijer <rmeijer-qWit8jRvyhVmR6Xm/[email protected]> • #15009
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:59:47 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15008
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:41:18 +0100
Valerio Bellizzomi <[email protected]> • #15007
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:57:23 -0800
Bill Frantz <[email protected]> • #15006
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:49:56 +0100
Valerio Bellizzomi <[email protected]> • #15005
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:47:24 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #15004
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:16:42 +1100
William ML Leslie <[email protected]> • #15003
Re: [SPAM] Re: Secure email
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:08:21 -0500
Sandro Magi <[email protected]> • #15002
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:07:05 +0100
Valerio Bellizzomi <[email protected]> • #15001
Re: [SPAM] Secure email
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:43:47 -0500
Sandro Magi <[email protected]> • #15000
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:10:38 +1100
Ben Kloosterman <[email protected]> • #14999
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:30:10 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14998
Re: Access control for IoT
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:11:57 +1100
Ben Kloosterman <[email protected]> • #14997
Re: Secure email (was: Re: [friam] and so it goes )
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:24:07 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14996
Secure email (was: Re: [friam] and so it goes )
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:56:03 -0800
Jed Donnelley <capability-iCFHVraI1K1Wk0Htik3J/[email protected]> • #14995
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:54:09 +0000
Baldur Johannsson <[email protected]> • #14994
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:07:42 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14993
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:59:00 +0100
Valerio Bellizzomi <[email protected]> • #14992
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:59:44 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14991
Re: Access control for IoT
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:42:22 +0100
Valerio Bellizzomi <[email protected]> • #14990
Re: Getting to default encrypted/signed email (was: Re: [friam] and so it goes)
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:03:05 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14989
Re: [SPAM] Re: [friam] and so it goes
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:57:43 -0500
Sandro Magi <[email protected]> • #14988
Re: [friam] and so it goes
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:18:02 +0000
Daira Hopwood <[email protected]> • #14987
Re: Getting to default encrypted/signed email (was: Re: [friam] and so it goes)
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:59:29 +0000
Tristan Slominski <[email protected]> • #14986
Getting to default encrypted/signed email (was: Re: [friam] and so it goes)
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 01:02:03 -0800
Jed Donnelley <capability-iCFHVraI1K1Wk0Htik3J/[email protected]> • #14985
Re: [friam] and so it goes
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 23:25:33 -0600
David Nicol <[email protected]> • #14984
Re: [friam] and so it goes
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 12:35:28 -0800
Jed Donnelley <capability-iCFHVraI1K1Wk0Htik3J/[email protected]> • #14983
Re: [SPAM] Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 12:42:00 -0800
Mike Stay <[email protected]> • #14982
Re: Access control for IoT
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 17:16:39 +0000
Tim Coote <[email protected]> • #14981
cap patterns in 1ml
Sat, 16 Jan 2016 18:11:59 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #14980
Re: [SPAM] Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:35:24 +0000 (GMT)
John Lee <[email protected]> • #14979
Re: Access control for IoT
Sat, 16 Jan 2016 10:26:17 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14978
Re: Access control for IoT
Sat, 16 Jan 2016 09:59:47 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14977
Re: Access control for IoT
Sat, 16 Jan 2016 15:51:24 +0000
Tim Coote <[email protected]> • #14976
Re: [SPAM] Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Fri, 15 Jan 2016 21:44:42 -0500
Sandro Magi <[email protected]> • #14975
Re: Access control for IoT
Fri, 15 Jan 2016 19:07:33 -0500
"Jack B. Dennis" <[email protected]> • #14974
Re: Access control for IoT
Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:59:48 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #14973
Re: Access control for IoT
Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:53:38 -0800
Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> • #14972
Access control for IoT
Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:13:58 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14971
Re: [e-lang] SOSP History Day
Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:34:25 -0800 (PST)
Tristan Slominski <[email protected]> • #14970
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:05:58 +0100
rmeijer <rmeijer-qWit8jRvyhVmR6Xm/[email protected]> • #14969
Re: fun with Capper and OFX financial transaction fetching
Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:31:25 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #14968
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Wed, 6 Jan 2016 08:45:29 -0800
Kevin Reid <kpreid-M/[email protected]> • #14967
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Wed, 6 Jan 2016 01:10:52 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #14966
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 19:20:23 -0700
Marc Stiegler <[email protected]> • #14965
Re: fun with Capper and OFX financial transaction fetching
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:46:35 -0700
Marc Stiegler <[email protected]> • #14964
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 16:05:04 -0800
Matt Rice <[email protected]> • #14963
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:40:01 -0800
Bill Frantz <[email protected]> • #14962
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:28:45 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14961
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:12:04 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14960
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:08:58 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14959
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:01:48 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #14958
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:00:09 -0800
Raoul Duke <[email protected]> • #14957
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 11:46:46 -0800
Mike Stay <[email protected]> • #14956
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 11:14:31 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14955
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:48:49 -0800
Raoul Duke <[email protected]> • #14954
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:19:34 -0800
Kenton Varda <[email protected]> • #14953
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:43:19 -0800
<[email protected]> • #14952
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:38:25 -0800
Alan Karp <[email protected]> • #14951
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 08:24:55 -0800
<[email protected]> • #14950
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 07:27:57 -0800
Raoul Duke <[email protected]> • #14949
Re: Joins on capabilities that have passed through different membranes
Tue, 5 Jan 2016 13:41:38 +0100
David Bruant <[email protected]> • #14948
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.