[cap-talk] Confinement subset of the CC problem ?? (Rob Meijer: Communicating conspirators)

[Rob]

>>I agree that I've moved the solution into
>>the confinement area, but I do think it still is a solution for the
>>(subset of) CC problem.
>
> The confinement subset?  The problems are considered distinct.
>
> I don't think this should be considered a failing.  Remember that many
> of us believe the conspiring communications 'problem' can't be
> solved.

I am getting the impression that instead of focusing on the confining
tainting-*-proxy that I tried to describe, what would as a first step be
more usefull would be to determine if what it tries to adress is atainable
seperate from adressing if it does atain this.

If we can agree that it may be possible to define a an intersection of
confinement and the CC problem, than after that we could focus on how
this intersection could be exploited to solve a subset of the CC problem
in a way that could be of practical use.

I will try to put my assumption in a statement:

"If you can define a confining proxy that abstracts away confinement and
would allow a single active object to effectively and naturally exist at
multiple levels at different levels at different times with the maximum
allowed (ss and * property enforcement) retention of state, than this
object can be defined as Bob in a subset of the CC problem. Doing so
will effectivly move the CC problem into that of the partialy solved
confinement problem."

If we can agree on this statement we may be able to again start discussing
the tainting-*-proxy that I proposed to fill the requirement in this
statement.

Rob