改进安全性的权衡:一份经验报告

Dynamic Languages Symposium Pub Date : 2007-10-22 DOI:10.1145/1297081.1297082

Mark S. Miller

{"title":"改进安全性的权衡:一份经验报告","authors":"Mark S. Miller","doi":"10.1145/1297081.1297082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1973, John Reynold's and James Morris' Gedanken language retrofit object-capability security into an Algol-like base. Today, there are active projects retrofitting Java, Javascript, Python, Mozart/Oz, OCaml, Perl, and Pict. These represent a variety of approaches, with different tradeoffs regarding legacy compatibility, safety, and expressivity. In this talk I propose a taxonomy of these approaches, and discuss some of the lessons learned to date.","PeriodicalId":344101,"journal":{"name":"Dynamic Languages Symposium","volume":"226 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tradeoffs in retrofitting security: an experience report\",\"authors\":\"Mark S. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1297081.1297082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1973, John Reynold's and James Morris' Gedanken language retrofit object-capability security into an Algol-like base. Today, there are active projects retrofitting Java, Javascript, Python, Mozart/Oz, OCaml, Perl, and Pict. These represent a variety of approaches, with different tradeoffs regarding legacy compatibility, safety, and expressivity. In this talk I propose a taxonomy of these approaches, and discuss some of the lessons learned to date.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344101,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dynamic Languages Symposium\",\"volume\":\"226 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dynamic Languages Symposium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1297081.1297082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dynamic Languages Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1297081.1297082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

1973年，John reynolds和James Morris的Gedanken语言将对象能力安全性改进为类似algol的基础。今天，有一些活跃的项目在改进Java、Javascript、Python、Mozart/Oz、OCaml、Perl和Pict。它们代表了各种各样的方法，在遗留兼容性、安全性和表达性方面进行了不同的权衡。在这次演讲中，我提出了这些方法的分类，并讨论了迄今为止学到的一些经验教训。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Tradeoffs in retrofitting security: an experience report

In 1973, John Reynold's and James Morris' Gedanken language retrofit object-capability security into an Algol-like base. Today, there are active projects retrofitting Java, Javascript, Python, Mozart/Oz, OCaml, Perl, and Pict. These represent a variety of approaches, with different tradeoffs regarding legacy compatibility, safety, and expressivity. In this talk I propose a taxonomy of these approaches, and discuss some of the lessons learned to date.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Dynamic Languages Symposium

自引率

0.00%

发文量