News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on GCC eBPF for Linux port has landed. Parent comment

Re:GCC eBPF for Linux port has landed by Dylan16807 on Monday September 09, 2019 @11:15PM (#20924763)
The defined semantics for those instructions include sandboxing. If there is no sandbox, it's not WASM. It wouldn't be implementing the instructions as described in the spec.

You can argue that a sandbox might be low quality. That's fine. But it doesn't make it non-sandboxed.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:GCC eBPF for Linux port has landed by devwastaken on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @10:00AM (#20928247)
"if there is no sandbox then it's not wasm".

You don't get to decide how an instruction set is used, and a 'low quality sandbox' is not a sandbox.

You've denied facts and continue to make both inexperienced and naieve claims that are dangerous. Not entertaining it further.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:GCC eBPF for Linux port has landed by Dylan16807 on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @10:15AM (#20928405)
If someone guesses what all the instructions are supposed to do and implements the wrong semantics, they didn't actually implement the same instruction set!

When all your security issues are violations of the spec, then it is not the language in the spec that is insecure.

[ Parent | on HN ]