[rc5] Security, Java, and Source

Ivo Janssen ivo at ricardis.tudelft.nl
Fri Oct 10 01:54:36 EDT 1997

On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, David M. Putzolu wrote:

> I'll reiterate my original Java points, because there most
> definitely appears to be a misunderstanding of them given
> what you write:
> * A certain number of people, X, will run native code. These
>   people are participating.
> * A certain number of people, Z, will not run native code due
>   to security risks. Some of these people might be willing to
>   run Java code.
> * As long as Z is non-zero and a Java implementation is able
>   to crack any keys at all, then X + Z > X.  So, there is *some*
>   benefit to having a Java client.

> * Beyond this, a Java client would provide a good, clean codebase
>   (given a good programmer, which the Bovine team has several of)
>   for reference when building native clients.  Java is a very
>   readable language - much more than straight C.
> * By using Java's native methods capability, it would be possible
>   to get ALL the performance benefits of "native, targeted,
>   hand-tuned assembly code." Furthermore, it would NOT be necessary
>   to re-write all the supporting infrastructure code (network,
>   GUI, etc.) for every platform.

So you're saying: core in assembler, networking in java.
But: the networking part is already here in C.
And this _should_ compile on almost every platform. Every platform
has it's C-compiler, including sockets, select, accept, etc.
(even dos has DJGPP/libsocket)

> So, why not use Java?  
It has been done? (in C).


To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.

More information about the rc5 mailing list