lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Virtual Machines, JVM in kernel, hot-swapped kernel
    Date
    From
    In message <19980831075742.A24126@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>, Jamie Lokier 
    write
    s:
    +-----
    | On Sat, Aug 29, 1998 at 08:09:36PM -0300, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
    | > A certain Knuth quote springs to mind. And if the proof verifier were
    | > np-complete (wouldn't it have to be?),
    |
    | I shouldn't think so. A rather uneducated guess from me says a proof
    | verification machine probably doesn't even need to be Turing-complete,
    +--->8

    Checking whether the proof is consistent wouldn't be, but how do you verify
    the proof "goes with" the code? Including a digital signature prevents
    spoofing, but doesn't promise that the code actually works as the proof
    claims. Aside from using the proof to construct a sandbox for the code and
    trapping deviations from the proof as exceptions, I don't see how you could
    verify this easily.

    --
    brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
    system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu
    electrical and computer engineering KF8NH
    carnegie mellon university



    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.021 / U:29.656 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site