It seems that most *BSD OS's are being developed primarily on the HP300
Please forgive my ignorance, what is it? Why is it the choice of
Thanks in advance.
Not really. NetBSD and OpenBSD will still run on them, but they are certainlyQuote:> It seems that most *BSD OS's are being developed primarily on the HP300
The development platform was not by choice. It was part
of the UCB/CSRG (University of California Berkeley/
Computer Science Research Group) project. The machines
may have been donated by HP for the project. But this
is my speculation.
Please check the historial references at ucb.edu for
the correct information.
For safety and security, the only kernel support needed is enough to
provide a reasonably virtualised machine. Linux ptrace(2) already
allows you to trap at each syscall entry and exit and the tracer can
then disallow unsafe syscalls. Opening files, network connections and
so on can be redirected by libc (or a library further up the preload
path than libc) and communicate with a manager process down an
already-open file descriptor. If it decides to let you open the file,
it sends the new file descriptor down the socket to you. So even
without additional kernel support, you can get a system in which you
can run any potentially-naughty binary that you like (whether that's
Java or not) and trap attempts to break out (and even go a long way
to avoiding some denial of service attacks). With the additional
kernel support of a per-process syscall mask you can do even better
(since ptrace mucks around with the process hierarchy a bit).
Oxford University Computing Services
"Widget. It's got a widget. A lovely widget. A widget it has got." --Jack Dee