[cap-talk] Horton at HotSec '07: How broadly object/capability?
Karp, Alan H
alan.karp at hp.com
Sun Jul 8 20:16:36 EDT 2007
I've read through the referee's comments, Jed's, and MarkM's response to
Jed. There are two different items that we need to deal with, the paper
and the talk. The paper that was accepted is about Horton, and it would
be irresponsible to rewrite it now to focus on capability systems in
general at the expense of the topic that was reviewed. The talk is a
different matter entirely. I have no problem spending much more time on
motivation and referring to the paper in the proceedings for details.
Since some of the referees were confused about some points, and we're
not getting more space, I think we should remove the implementation
details. We can refer to the tech report or erights.org for people who
want to see the code. Depending on how much space we decide to devote
to motivation, we might even leave out the details of the protocol and
provide only a sketch.
How long is the talk? In a 20 minute talk, MarkM (I'm not going.) can
split the time between motivation and protocol. A 10 minute talk makes
the decision harder. Which is it?
I wouldn't get too hung up on the "Hot" in HotSec. The paper got
accepted, so somebody in a position of responsiility thinks it's hot
Virus Safe Computing Initiative
1501 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(650) 857-3967, fax (650) 857-7029
More information about the cap-talk