[rc5] Security, Java, and Source
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