[cap-talk] What does the [defense?] security community really fear from capabilities?

Jonathan S. Shapiro shap at eros-os.com
Sat Jul 14 01:46:23 EDT 2007


On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:25 -0700, Jed Donnelley wrote:

> 1966: Dennis & Van Horn paper - MIT 
> 1967: PDP-1 Supervisor - MIT 
> 1967: Magic Number Machine - University of Chicago 
> 1968: CAL-TSS - Berkeley 
> 1969: System 250 - Plessey Corporation 
> 1970: CAP - Cambridge University 
> 1971: Project SUE - University of Toronto 
> 1971: Hydra - Carnegie Mellon 
> 1972: RATS - Lawrence Livermore 
> 1973: Actors - MIT 
> 1973: PSOS - SRI 
> 1975: StarOS - Carnegie Mellon 
> 1975: GNOSIS/KeyKOS - Tymshare 
> 1976: Monads - Monash University 
> 1978: System/38 - IBM 
> 1978: NLTSS - Lawrence Livermore 
> 1980: SWARD - IBM 
> 1980: PDP 11 operating system - University of Texas 
> 1981: Amoeba - Free University Amsterdam 
> 1982: iAPX 432 - Intel 
> 1982: Password-Capability System - Monash University 


Note: System/38 is more popularly known as AS/400.

This is an important list. Ask yourself which of these systems received
positive *mainstram* attention. The *only* one I know about is S/38.

Amoeba was not a protected capability system.

Cal/TSS was never finished.
-- 
Jonathan S. Shapiro, Ph.D.
Managing Director
The EROS Group, LLC



More information about the cap-talk mailing list