This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the systemtap project.
RE: safety.tex
- From: "Chen, Brad" <brad dot chen at intel dot com>
- To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>, <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 17:09:16 -0700
- Subject: RE: safety.tex
I'm happy with making some changes to this; sorry to
not have thought more carefully about the implications
of your earlier comments. I'm wondering if anybody
else has thoughts on this before I attempt improvements.
Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: systemtap-owner@sources.redhat.com
[mailto:systemtap-owner@sources.redhat.com] On Behalf Of Frank Ch.
Eigler
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 9:40 AM
To: systemtap@sources.redhat.com
Subject: safety.tex
Hi -
Brad has added some text to the archpaper/safety.tex file, thank you!
I would like to change the wording of the last row of the table, the
one that currently says that "separate policy from mechanism" is a
feature provided by the static validator. This is for the reasons
I've mentioned before about misuse of a general design philosophy as a
buzzword.
I believe terminology like the previous line "end-to-end security" is
better. Something like "secondary policy verification" would be more
specific (keeping in mind that "initial policy verification" would be
done by the translator itself).
- FChE