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:0.122 / U:0.620 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site