> You're not actually reading Java code to see if it's secure, are you?
>
> Actually, if you look at that again, you'll notice that he mentions that
the
> closer you get to the hardware, the harder it is to find the bug. Since C
> and C++ are both closer than Java, I should be trusting apps written in
Java
> more than those written in C or C++. What is Meme written in again?
Uh... first of all - my point wasn't to slam Java in particular. Nor was my
point to say ANYTHING about Meme at all. My point was merely that I wanted
to wake people up a little to the fact that you can NEVER be sure that even
the most benign thing - even if we can esad it's source - is really safe.
There is really no such thing as a "100% safe" system.
That was all.
Who knows, there might be a Pentium virus wired into the microcode of the
processor?
A floating point virus maybe? :-)
- - -
As for your comment on Meme - the Meme virtual machine and compiler is
written in C, and so is the Java virtual machine and compiler. So I don't
see your comparision.
Actually, [Correct me if I am wrong] Java gives you access to system level
DLL's! So what stops me to send a virii DLL along with my Java applet!?
Meme doesn't allow that.
Note: I won't say that Meme is a dream of security. It is not, especially
not in the beta stage it is in. [Stuff like file-scope limitations are yet
to be implemented].
But - and that is the important part - NOR HAS IT CLAIMED TO BE.
Jave CLAIMS to be "oh so safe", and then it has a LOT to live up to.
> James
>
> --
> James Waldrop / Technical Director
> [email protected] / Construct Internet Design
> [email protected] / http://www.construct.net
-- Hakan "Zap" Andersson |http://www.lysator.liu.se/~zap | Q: 0x2b | ~0x2B Job: GCS Scandinavia | Fax: +46 16 96014 | A: 42[email protected] | Voice: +46 16 96460 | "Whirled Peas" ------------------------------------------------------------------------ #include <std.disclamier.h> ------------------------------------------------------------------------