tech-net archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]


On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:14 AM, Darren Reed <> wrote:
> No. It's not about calling a function, it is about proving the BPF
> program is correct and secure.
> BPF today is essentially assembly language operations that are all
> easily tested and verified.

There's a one-word summary: *assurance*.  With the current design,
it's easy to *know* what can happen.  With a Turing-complete extension,
it isn't.

Assurance is often what separates actually secure systems from ones that
are merely claimed to be secure.

                --Steve Bellovin,

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index