On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 06:10:44PM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote:
> 
> Of the three names you have mentioned (fingerprinted/signed/hashed
> exec), I like "fingerprinted exec" best.  The term "signed exec" conveys
> the (false) impression that there's some kind of public/private key
> pair involved.  The term "hashed exec" raises the question of whether
> the hashing is done for some kind of perfomance (rather than security)
> reason.  The term "fingerprinted exec" carries the implication that the
> fingerprinting has some security purpose, but does not imply that there
> are any signatures.
> 

Yes.. I agree with all the above but I thought "fingerprinted exec"
too cumbersome myself, some other thoughts for names I just had were:

1) secure exec
2) trusted exec
3) verified exec

At the moment I think 2 conveys what I am on about best...(but 1 means
less changes for me ;-)

-- 
Brett Lymn