Re: TGS driving VRML 2.0?
Sami Shaio ([email protected])
Mon, 17 Apr 1995 14:01:34 -0700
|From: [email protected] (Mike Roberts)
|
|On Apr 17, 12:06pm, Dave Nadeau wrote:
|Dave wrote :
| {edited...}
|> 3. Security security security. Downloading a binary, linking it in to
|> your application automatically, then executing it is a virus writer's
|> dream.
|> An interpreted language, such as Java, addresses each of these issues.
|> It may be a hassle, but the consequences of not doing it are horrifying.
|
|Agreed, but I think we both agree that it is not the fact that the language is
|interpreted that provides the benefit, but because the transformative apsects of
|the language on the local system are restricted in some way ...
|
Actually Java's properties are central to its security story. The fact
that it doesn't allow pointer arithmetic and unchecked array accesses
and compiles into interpreted bytecodes is what makes it possible to
check whether a Java program is violating the language constraints. Once
it can be shown the language constraints hold, it is then possible to
restrict the runtime so that it can respect some security policy. Doing
this sort of checking with arbitrary binaries would be very hard
to do.
|-- Mike
--sami