From owner-freebsd-chat  Thu Nov 29 11:49:26 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from freebie.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-101-2-1-14.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.251.59.14])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE8137B416
	for <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:49:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from contactdish (win.atkielski.com [10.0.0.10])
	by freebie.atkielski.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fATJn5x04241;
	Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:49:07 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from anthony@freebie.atkielski.com)
Message-ID: <02b101c1790e$e802df90$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com>
To: "Giorgos Keramidas" <charon@labs.gr>
Cc: <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
References: <15365.11290.211107.464324@guru.mired.org> <006101c17854$c6aa2570$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <01112817112006.13219@prime.vsservices.com> <016301c17888$c1be3cc0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011129115922.GA75539@hades.hell.gr>
Subject: Re: Feeding the Troll (Was: freebsd as a desktop ?)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:49:02 +0100
Organization: Anthony's Home Page (development site)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-chat.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-chat>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-chat>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Giorgos writes:

> Why?

Because a single-user system does not have the overhead of a multiuser system,
and it is more ergonomic as well.

> "More applications" for what definition of "more"
> and "applications" ?

More = larger number, applications = anything that runs under the OS but is not
part of it.

> For what definition of "secure"?

Not crashing the system.

> It needs to do stuff to the system console, that
> the kernel of the OS does not know (or does not
> care about).

It should not be bypassing the OS.

> This seems to be modular, but insecure?

Yes.  Windows NT doesn't allow this, or at least it didn't (many corners have
been cut in more recent versions, sacrificing security for performance).


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message