Re: Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
> We're not bringing Linux forward if we stick to 30-year-old concepts.
Hi there.
I am not trying to argue with you - I would just like to point out
something to you...
--The following is my opinion--
Just because something is very old, does not necessarily make it
wrong, obsolete, or require that it be changed.
The unix model stemmed from when computers were mainframes and single
user systems had not been conceived.
Unix's design of minimal permissions was/is a good idea. Since not
everything running reflects the mindset of just one person, it makes
sense to isolate users from messing with one another. Or, to allow for
some relative sanctuary while using the system with others logged in.
It worked well to keep the peace.
Computer viruses (really) emerged when microsoft threw that notion to
the wind and made their os a single user system with unlimited power
and no layers of permissions to protect the integrity of the system.
It's like if the pentagon upgraded every united states government
employee with the highest security clearance. Sure the spec ops guy
has clearance. So does the janitor and the delivery guy as well. It's
defcon 1 24/7.
That is why viruses are so prevalent. That is the real reason.
Sure they existed before, but were isolated occurances.
Not the epidemic we have today.
So unix stayed with the idea of minimal permissions for 40 years. They
still stay with it. So does linux.
Just about every os I can think of that has some resistance to malware
uses a security model somehow based on separation of permissions.
If something makes sense, has a sound foundation, is concrete in its
logic...... and does not involve some specific point in time in some
way.....
...... then the passage of time does not invalidate that idea.
That idea should be succeeded by a better idea.
That idea should not be obsoleted simply because it's 30 years old.
We use the mathematics of relativity and trigonometry to make GPS work, btw.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#History
-Kev
Reply to: