[cap-talk] Objects and Facets

[Norman Hardy]

On Aug 8, 2006, at 5:49 PM, Jed at Webstart wrote:

> At 08:31 AM 8/8/2006, Norman Hardy wrote:
>> I grant the following points made in the mail below (and previously).

........

>
>> I don't know whether you can
>> generally avoid the term.
>> Both of our descriptions need additionally to specify that the three
>> returned capabilities provide the only access to the state.
>> (I would bundle such security requirements with the specifications.)
>> I don't know whether some style of description can cover this
>> implicitly.
>
> I'm not sure whether it would even be appropriate to do so.  What  
> about
> the server itself?  Are you arguing that it doesn't have access to  
> these
> services?  What about the owner of the system?  Suppose new  
> capabilities
> are created that provide the same permission?  Are the old  
> capabilities
> any less "capabilities" because there are new means to these ends?

I am saying just that. See <http://cap-lore.com/CapTheory/NewStyle>  
for agonizing over whether this is wise.