[cap-talk] disputing the slam against network capabilities, esp. confinement/auditing

[David Wagner]

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
>>>constraint."
>>
>>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).