[cap-talk] Confinement Confusion (was: Communicating conspirators)

[David Wagner]

Mark Miller writes:
>I agree, but for the phrase "the *-property could also be viewed as an 
>approach to achieving bit-confinement". If X is a necessary step for achieving 
>Y, but not sufficient for achieving Y, then it seems strange and confusing to 
>me to say that Y is an approach for achieving X.

It sounds like you are saying that the *-property is not sufficient
to ensure bit-confinement.  Can you explain that?  As far as I know,
if the *-property is faithfully followed at every level of the system,
and applied to every system resource, then I suspect it is sufficient
for bit-confinement (in the sense that High processes are confined and
cannot leak bits to Low processes).  Is that not the case?