4 ms·

Sandboxing isn't a substitute for having your drivers be open source. Even if all drivers were written in safe languages, you'd still have CVEs and still want t

by catern 9y ago

Sandboxing isn't a substitute for having your drivers be open source. Even if all drivers were written in safe languages, you'd still have CVEs and still want to fix those CVEs.

quotemstr 9y ago
Closed source Linux drivers exist. Open source Windows drivers exist. An unstable kernel ABI is neither necessary nor sufficient a condition for open sourcing drivers.
- catern 9y ago
  True but irrelevant. The key new "feature" of Fuschia is that its stable ABI makes closed-source drivers easier to write in the short term, relative to Linux. As a result, the vast majority of Fuschia drivers will be closed-source. Don't you agree? I believe supporting a stable API and closed-source drivers will result in a technically inferior, more complex, less stable kernel. The Linux model of including all the drivers in a single open source codebase, where the drivers can be refactored and improved along with the rest of the kernel, is a genuinely superior way to develop a kernel, which produces a genuinely technically superior product. I just hope Google realizes this before they sink too many millions into Fuschia.
  - quotemstr 9y ago
    I think we can at least agree that the proof is in the pudding.
naasking 9y ago
You seriously think that open source drivers would have fewer CVEs than sandboxed drivers?
- catern 9y ago
  How exactly are you going to sandbox your drivers? Run them in user-mode, perhaps? But then you've constructed a microkernel, and no-one uses your system because it's slow. Anyway, what I said is that sandboxing isn't a substitute for open-sourcing. They are complements, not substitutes.
  - naasking 9y ago
    > But then you've constructed a microkernel, and no-one uses your system because it's slow. FUD. L4 is the most widely deployed kernel in the world. > Anyway, what I said is that sandboxing isn't a substitute for open-sourcing. Given reality, something must substitute for open source drivers. Sandboxing is certainly the obvious choice.
    - catern 9y ago
      >Given reality, something must substitute for open source drivers Linux is quite real, I assure you.

by catern 9y ago

Sandboxing isn't a substitute for having your drivers be open source. Even if all drivers were written in safe languages, you'd still have CVEs and still want to fix those CVEs.

quotemstr 9y ago

Closed source Linux drivers exist. Open source Windows drivers exist. An unstable kernel ABI is neither necessary nor sufficient a condition for open sourcing drivers.

catern 9y ago
True but irrelevant. The key new "feature" of Fuschia is that its stable ABI makes closed-source drivers easier to write in the short term, relative to Linux. As a result, the vast majority of Fuschia drivers will be closed-source. Don't you agree? I believe supporting a stable API and closed-source drivers will result in a technically inferior, more complex, less stable kernel. The Linux model of including all the drivers in a single open source codebase, where the drivers can be refactored and improved along with the rest of the kernel, is a genuinely superior way to develop a kernel, which produces a genuinely technically superior product. I just hope Google realizes this before they sink too many millions into Fuschia.
- quotemstr 9y ago
  I think we can at least agree that the proof is in the pudding.

naasking 9y ago

You seriously think that open source drivers would have fewer CVEs than sandboxed drivers?

catern 9y ago
How exactly are you going to sandbox your drivers? Run them in user-mode, perhaps? But then you've constructed a microkernel, and no-one uses your system because it's slow. Anyway, what I said is that sandboxing isn't a substitute for open-sourcing. They are complements, not substitutes.
- naasking 9y ago
  > But then you've constructed a microkernel, and no-one uses your system because it's slow. FUD. L4 is the most widely deployed kernel in the world. > Anyway, what I said is that sandboxing isn't a substitute for open-sourcing. Given reality, something must substitute for open source drivers. Sandboxing is certainly the obvious choice.
  - catern 9y ago
    >Given reality, something must substitute for open source drivers Linux is quite real, I assure you.