Re:Android security in 2016 is a mess
by zzzcpan on Monday November 28, 2016 @04:23PM
(#13058554)
I think with microkernel architecture this could have been very different. Even touching the kernel would keep outdated only a tiny part of the system with a relatively small attack surface, the rest could still get updates.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
It would have, but in 1991 it would have taken some powerful crystal balls to architect towards a fragmented mobile hardware ecosystem unified by a JVM-run app platform.
Re:Android security in 2016 is a mess
by rogerbinns on Tuesday November 29, 2016 @01:19PM
(#13064958)
Microkernels wouldn't really help. The point of a microkernel is to drastically reduce the coupling between parts of a system. Current hardware has far more coupling between parts. For example power management requires coupling (consider a NIC on a USB controller on a PCIe bus) where all pieces need to pull together. Or consider something like scheduling in a world where processor cores aren't identical and what runs where matters.
Your microkernel would either perform way worse (eg worse power consumption), or have pieces so tightly coupled that you'll wonder if it was worth it.
Well, they will still have to import all the upstream changes, and make sure that all the parts play well with each other, which, they can still do. Except that they don't.
I think what makes it hard is the dizzying variety of CPUs that makes it all hard to keep up with. I have heard from insiders that as far as manufacturers are concerned, a CPU stays "current" for about 6 months.