On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Bill Royds wrote: > You are saying that a language that requires every programmer to check for > security problems on every statement of every program is just as secure as > one that enforces proper security as an inherent part of its syntax? > And I suppose that you also believe in the tooth fairy.
Well, no, but I don't believe your theory either. VMS usually gets held up as an example of an OS without significant security problems. Sorry to tell you, but DEC wrote VMS mainly in VAX-11 assembler. The Alpha-CPU port of VMS involved writing a VAX-11 assember compiler, and compiling the VAX assembly code to Alpha object code. VAX-11 assembler, although nifty in a macro sort of way, and orthogonal to the point of distraction, had exactly none of the features you claim help secure an OS. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
