Re:ZeroVM: lightweight containers based on Google Native Client
by prodigal_erik on Saturday March 24, 2012 @04:55PM
(#3750702)
True, even the JVM verifier was flawed, maybe neither approach can succeed. It just seems to me we now have good reason to believe it's a dead end to try to sandbox native code in legacy instruction sets.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:ZeroVM: lightweight containers based on Google Native Client
by camuel on Sunday March 25, 2012 @07:58AM
(#3752353)
Every system might have weaknesses. What matters is:
1. Small surface for attack. With NaCl it is all concentrated in single tiny validator module. The model is also simple and mathematically proven to be secure. 2. Prior testing. It is especially hard for security product. Establishing motivating prizes is good way to ensure it is not easily breakable. 3. The speed with which patch is made available 4. Defense-in-depth, ability to have multiple levels of defense cheaply.