Re: Software Design (was: Re: [tlug] Confessions of a closet OpenBSD user)

[Viktor Pavlenko <vvp@example.com>]

>>>>> "VT" == Uva Coder <uvacoder@example.com> writes:

    VT> It doesn't matter how elegant your (userland) code appears.

Most of the code is userland.

    VT> If Linux's (and *BSD's) overall security model contains
    VT> significant flaws in its design, then attempting to create the
    VT> fix in the userland isn't the best answer. The answer lay with
    VT> the kernel itself. Design, especially security, begins with
    VT> the kernel.

True that security begins with the kernel but it doesn't end there.
Kernel has to support many insecure operations to be usable.

    VT> Blaming sloppy userland development seems to me to be a red
    VT> herring.

You can't even imagine how wrong you are.

    VT> IMO what Linux, *BSD, and UNIX need are innovative ideas
    VT> incorporated at the kernel level; not at the userland
    VT> level. Plan 9's IL protocol is a good example of out of the
    VT> box thinking.

    VT> I believe that if Linux fails as an OS, it will be due to too
    VT> much "in-the-box" thinking; not from "sloppy" code.

If linux fails it will be because too many things will have been moved
into the kernel.

my 2 CD cents

Viktor