4 ms·

For those wondering, the article makes an analogy between Thompson's 'Trusting Trust' paper and gene editing. It wouldn't have surprised me to hear that Thomps

by rm445 10y ago

For those wondering, the article makes an analogy between Thompson's 'Trusting Trust' paper and gene editing. It wouldn't have surprised me to hear that Thompson had moved into gene hacking (at the age of 74) but I think he still works for Google.

mauricioc 10y ago
The analogy helped me understand things a bit, but I have a question coming from what I think is an oversimplification in the explanation of Thompson's Trusting Trust concept. In the Trusting Trust attack, not only you change the compiler to miscompile the "login" program, but you change the compiler to miscompile the compiler itself so the "login" miscompilation persists even if you later revert all changes to the compiler source (as long as you use the new binary once, of course). Does this part of the attack have a gene drive analogy?
- jfarlow 10y ago
  That part of the analogy does persist. It is the feature. The gene drive doesn't just insert the change you want - it inserts the change, and the code to make the change: Wild type mosquito DNA: ================= Desired change to DNA: =============XX== DNA encoding Cas9 and XX-Payload: =C9(XX)= Gene Drivered Mosquito (before activation) (change to compiler): ====C9(XX)============= Gene Drivered Mosquito (after activation) (change to login code): ====C9(XX)========XX=== ------------------------------ A normal mosquito mating with a XX mutant mosquito: Mother Gamete: ----------------- Father Gamete: -------------XX-- Mendelian fraction of children (and grandchildren) are either --, --/XX,, or XX/XX (if two chromosomal copies) A normal mosquito mating with a Gene Drivered mosquito: Mother Gamete: ----------------- Father Gamete: ---C9(XX)----XX-- All children: ====C9(XX)========XX=== (for all 'N' chromosomal copies)
forgotpwtomain 10y ago
Interesting that you brought that you should bring this up - reminded me to dig up this old Ken Thompson interview[0] (see the section starting at COMPUTER SCIENCE AND THE FUTURE) he talks about the increasing complexity and specialization of computer science as a field as a barrier to innovation, and suggests: Well, I had to give advice to my son, and my advice to him—to the next generation—was to get into biology. Definitely worth a read through the whole interview even if you don't agree. [0] http://genius.cat-v.org/ken-thompson/interviews/unix-and-beyond http://genius.cat-v.org/ken-thompson/interviews/unix-and-bey...

by rm445 10y ago

mauricioc 10y ago

The analogy helped me understand things a bit, but I have a question coming from what I think is an oversimplification in the explanation of Thompson's Trusting Trust concept. In the Trusting Trust attack, not only you change the compiler to miscompile the "login" program, but you change the compiler to miscompile the compiler itself so the "login" miscompilation persists even if you later revert all changes to the compiler source (as long as you use the new binary once, of course). Does this part of the attack have a gene drive analogy?

jfarlow 10y ago
That part of the analogy does persist. It is the feature. The gene drive doesn't just insert the change you want - it inserts the change, and the code to make the change: Wild type mosquito DNA: ================= Desired change to DNA: =============XX== DNA encoding Cas9 and XX-Payload: =C9(XX)= Gene Drivered Mosquito (before activation) (change to compiler): ====C9(XX)============= Gene Drivered Mosquito (after activation) (change to login code): ====C9(XX)========XX=== ------------------------------ A normal mosquito mating with a XX mutant mosquito: Mother Gamete: ----------------- Father Gamete: -------------XX-- Mendelian fraction of children (and grandchildren) are either --, --/XX,, or XX/XX (if two chromosomal copies) A normal mosquito mating with a Gene Drivered mosquito: Mother Gamete: ----------------- Father Gamete: ---C9(XX)----XX-- All children: ====C9(XX)========XX=== (for all 'N' chromosomal copies)

forgotpwtomain 10y ago

Interesting that you brought that you should bring this up - reminded me to dig up this old Ken Thompson interview[0] (see the section starting at COMPUTER SCIENCE AND THE FUTURE) he talks about the increasing complexity and specialization of computer science as a field as a barrier to innovation, and suggests: Well, I had to give advice to my son, and my advice to him—to the next generation—was to get into biology. Definitely worth a read through the whole interview even if you don't agree. [0] http://genius.cat-v.org/ken-thompson/interviews/unix-and-beyond http://genius.cat-v.org/ken-thompson/interviews/unix-and-bey...