[e-lang] Not so fast (re: "The lost resolution bug isn't")

[David-Sarah Hopwood]

<http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/The_lost_resolution_bug_isn%27t>

# Lost resolution: If VatA has a far (resolved) reference to Carol in VatC,
# and sends a message to Bob in VatB containing that reference, then it will
# arrive as a remote promise (for the result of a nonce-lookup sent to VatC)
# rather than a far ref.
#
# The plan to fix this was to introduce the WormholeOp, which would allow
# VatA to send to VatB the (encrypted) messages it wanted to arrive at VatC
# before the messages from Bob to Carol (preserving E-order).
#
# However, given that we want all far refs to the same object to be ==, and
# we want == objects to be absolutely indistinguishable, and that something
# in VatB has a reference to Carol, Bob would necessarily receive the
# existing far reference to Carol,

Yes...

# and Bob, possibly with the collusion of VatB (not delivering the
# WormholeOp traffic, or delaying it), can then violate E-order by sending
# messages too soon.

... but the alternative solution to the lost resolution bug described in

<http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2009-January/012067.html>
<http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2009-January/012068.html>

is able to prevent this, I think.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com