example: secure computing kernel needed

[David Wagner]

Jerrold Leichter  wrote:
>We've met the enemy, and he is us.  *Any* secure computing kernel that can do
>the kinds of things we want out of secure computing kernels, can also do the
>kinds of things we *don't* want out of secure computing kernels.

I don't understand why you say that.  You can build perfectly good
secure computing kernels that don't contain any support for remote
attribution.  It's all about who has control, isn't it?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com