|
> Both Frank and Leif are correct. They just happen to be talking about two > different things. I say this without having read either of their books, but > with knowledge of how the system works. > > When Frank Soltis and others say that pointers cannot be counterfeited they > are talking about programs that are created through the machine interface > (MI) by the trusted translator. All of the compilers on the system must use > the trusted translator. It will not create a program that will manufacture > a pointer because the trusted translator enforces the MI and the MI > includes no mechanism for arbitrarily constructing pointers. Ed puts it well: as long as the trusted translator produces your program you secure. This is protection by software. In fact, with the trusted translator being the only 'producer' of code you don't need hardware protection at all. Java on the AS/400 runs without the tagged pointers. So one more time: the protection (or detection) is SOFTWARE. Taht was my small point.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.