[cap-talk] disputing the slam against network
capabilities, esp. confinement/auditing
daw at cs.berkeley.edu
Sun Oct 17 22:44:43 EDT 2004
Valerio Bellizzomi wrote:
>On 16/10/2004, at 23.23, David Wagner wrote:
>>Jonathan Shapiro writes:
>>>Actually, I believe that you meant "enforced as an exogenously imposed
>>Not to be nitpicky, but how else could you enforce something?
>>In computer security, in every case I can think of, the entity
>>doing the enforcing is different than ("exogenous to"?) the entity
>>upon which the constraint is enforced. Can you give an example
>>of a constraint that is enforced in a non-exogenous manner?
>I guess the best example is an agent-based system. Each agent will
>autoimpose to himself a set of constraints.
That's too abstract for me. Can you give a more concrete example?
Do you mean that an agent might select a policy that is to be enforced
on itself? But even then it is not the agent doing the enforcement;
it is some external entity that is doing the enforcement (even if the
policy is selected by the agent).
More information about the cap-talk