Subject: Re: what's in a name? fingerprinted exec
To: NetBSD Security Technical Discussion List <tech-security@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Jason R. Fink <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/16/2002 11:02:42
> > How about "verixec"? VERIfied eXEC
or vexec ...
> I don't see the point of contracting the meaning right out of the words
> just to make some silly new word which rolls off the tounge reasonably
> easily. I think "verified exec" is perfectly fine all by itself. It
> encapsulates the meaning of the concept without too many chances for
> false connotations or mis-perceptions and though it already uses a bit
> of jargon ("exec"), it doesn't invent new jargon.
> With popularity and wide-spread use some well understood contraction or
> acronym may evolve or drift down into books and documentation just as
> has happened with "exec". However attempting to cause its precipitation
> before anyone can even use the tool in question is, I think, putting the
> cart before the horse. After all I hope we're still not looking for
> some identifier symbol name that has to fit in six characters! ;-)
No we are not, but this involves the actual code as well and I
do not like the idea of "verified_exec()" or "kern_verfied_exec.c"
(the latter of which breaks a convention).
veri_exec() and/or kern_vexec.c make more sense from a coding
standpoint, however, the "Name itself" certainly could (should???)
be "Verified Executables."
Jay Fink <http://jrf.odpn.net/>
NetBSD Developer <http://www.netbsd.org/>
Senior SysAdmin/Programmer, Ipsos <http://www.ipsos.com/>